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 2007;334:1136-1138 (2 June), doi:10.1136/bmj.39223.746042.59
Nigel Hawkes, health editor
Times
nigel.hawkes@thetimes.co.uk
Will Gordon Brown as prime minister give independence to the NHS, and is it such a winning idea anyway? Nigel Hawkes investigates
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Politicians seldom admit that their presence may not be strictly necessary. But the debate over NHS independence, launched in the BMJ in 2006, has inspired some soul searching. Has political meddling held back progress or interfered with the ability of medical professionals to deliver the best possible service for the money? Might an independent NHS, shorn of day to day management by ministers, work more smoothly and harmoniously?
Among those in favour of the proposition are David Cameron and Andrew Lansley of the Conservative party, the Council of the BMA, policy analyst Chris Ham of the University of Birmingham, top NHS manager Mark Britnell, and Gordon Brown.
Among those against are Tony Blair, Alan Milburn, the health minister Andy Burnham, John Appleby of the King's Fund, Nigel Edwards of the NHS Confederation, and Gordon Brown.
The future prime minister's presence on both lists is no accident. He famously likes to
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Technorati What's this?
Read all Rapid Responses