Jeremy Hunt has just produced a White Paper on simplifying the regulatory machinery for health professionals – again. This, on the same day that figures emerged showing that the NHS has failed to meet waiting targets for A&E:

• 82% of patient were transferred or discharged within 4 hours of arriving in A&E compared to the target of 95%;
• 60,000 spent between 4 and 12 hours waiting more than 12 hours trolleys in A&E corridors
• 780 people waited more than 12 hours for a bed.

This is the worst performance since the targets were introduced in 2004.
And its worth remembering that each of these 780 is actually a sick person needing hospital level care.

The BMA, the head of the Royal College of GPs, the head of the Royal College of Surgeons: all have expressed – this week -their concern that the NHS is facing crippling pressures. And what does the government do:  it orders a review of the royal college regulatory machinery!

Proposing a review of regulatory machinery is not cost free. It costs money to ‘review existing arrangements’. Senior staff have to make time to read the proposals, consult with colleagues, write responses, when they could be contributing that same time to patient care. They are already using their administrative time to try to improve the way their services function by better integrating services locally. And so these proposals also increase ‘opportunity costs’ – the costs of not doing one thing to do another – adding even more to the time pressures experienced by already over-burdened health professionals.

This Mad Hatter of a Health Secretary is doing everything he can to ignore what seasoned – and long suffering – health professionals are pointing out is a crisis in health care provision. We are simply not providing sufficient resources to tackle the problems we are facing.  This week a new category of health personnel was invented:  ‘corridor nurse’.  Surely it is clear that we do not have enough people to do the jobs we are demanding of them in the NHS today.  One Junior Doctor is quoted today as saying he is ‘falling down with exhaustion’ – and he isn’t alone.

Is this really what we as patients, as taxpayers, as citizens want? An Ipsos/Mori poll out this week reported that more than 2 in 5 people would pay more taxes to fund the NHS.  Fifty-three percent – more than voted to Leave the EU – favour increasing National Insurance payments to increase NHS resources.

So, why are we waiting? And what are we waiting for?  These problems can’t wait for Brexit to be sorted out.  They need tackling now.  Call your MP; do everything you can to help Mrs May see the problems she is missing, veiled by Brexit and an overly optimistic Health Secretary.

Waiting times in the NHS are going up.  The situation in England got so bad this year that some targets were removed.  The rationale given  for this is that ‘targets are detrimental to improving performance as they focus attention on the wrong issues’. Well let’s see how that is working out in practice.

First a little history:  in 2009 waiting lists were low enough for leading economists to propose that variable waiting times be introduced, set by local area health authorities, to better match clinical need and demand.

In 2009 a Labour Government was still in power and funding for the NHS was at, for the UK, historically high levels (But not out of line with spending levels in comparable countries).

Today in 2016 NHS spending is lower than it was on 2009, both in real terms and as a proportion of GDP.  In terms of international comparisons.  For example:

• In 2000,  the UK was spending 6.3% of its GDP on healthcare.
• Tony Blair, as PM, committed to increasing this spending to 8.5 % of GDP to bring the UK into line with the other 14 EU countries’ then level of spending on health care.
• By 2009, the UK was spending 8.8% of its GDP on healthcare (by which time the EU average had increased to 10.1%)
• By 2014, the UK spend on healthcare as a proportion of GDP had gone down to 7.3%.
• Between 2014/15 and 2020/21, the UK’s GDP is expected to grow by 15.2% BUT the proportion of spending on healthcare by then is not expected to increase by more than 5.2%, meaning that we will be spending only 6.6% of our GDP on healthcare.
• By this time (2020/21) we would need to increase our spending on the NHS by 30% -£43bn – to match our EU neighbours’ healthcare  spending levels.

Is this really what we want for ourselves or for our nearest and dearest?  The UK government is committed to increasing healthcare expenditure but the projected increases are nowhere near to helping us match our EU neighbours’ spends on healthcare.

Does this really matter?  Well, think about the waiting times for diagnosis and  treatment that you, your neighbours and friends, and relatives are currently facing.

We know that waiting a long time for diagnosis and treatment is not only a source of great anxiety for individuals and their families. It also can result in people getting sicker and thus needing more treatment for longer.  It can make the difference between outpatient treatment and inpatient care too.

In the past 6 months I’ve had two reasons for referrals for two different -both cancer-related, though- problems.  In each case the referral was classed as ‘urgent’.  The first was a source of a lot of anxiety because of family history.  After 6 months’ wait I gave up and went privately (a year later an NHS slot became available).  The other was quicker, but still too long-and in the end needed a bigger incision, and more stitches, than it would have if it had been dealt with as quickly as my GP had expected it to have been.

I bet that you and your family can recount similar stories.  It is not good enough for any of us.  Maybe its time we spent less time and energy talking about the terms of Brexit and more time debating what really will make a difference to us:  the NHS and how to ensure it is fit for our purposes!