Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2005;330 (30 April), doi:10.1136/bmj.330.7498.0-g
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Next week Britain has a general election, and over the past three weeks Nick Timmins has been dissecting the manifestos of the three main UK parties (16 April, p 866; 23 April, p 925; p 981). Although sceptical about manifestos"a newly landed Martian reading Labour's 1997 manifesto and looking at the NHS today would be entitled to wonder how on earth we got from there to here"Timmins works hard to find real differences between the parties. So do our three commentators (p 986). Indeed, Keiran Walshe argues that the electorate doesn't have much choice: "If you believe in a nationalised NHS or if you want to see health care privatised, you don't have anyone to vote for."
Lack of anyone to vote for is a problem because it implies a muted discussion of values and trade offs. The main criticism of this current election is
Jane Smith, deputy editor
(jsmith@bmj.com)
Read all Rapid Responses