“WITH the Conservatives there will be no more of the tiresome, meddlesome, top-downrestructures that have dominated the last decade of the NHS.” So said David Cameron in 2009,and many were convinced. Voters made Mr Cameron prime minister in2010 inpart because theConservative Party cut into Labour's lead on health care, which it had enjoyed almost since itfounded the NHS in 1948. The Tories quickly squandered their advantage. But their legacy willbe better than they seem to believe.
“有了保守黨,NHS(National Health Service 英國國民健康保險制度)近十年主要的惱人、好事、專制的醫療結構會一掃而光”,這是英國首相卡梅倫在2009年說過的話,且廣受信服。2010年,選民把戴維·卡梅倫選為首相,有部分原因是因為保守黨插手了工黨主導的醫療保健項目,這個項目幾乎自從1948年設立了NHS就贊譽頗多。然而保守黨很快就把優勢糟蹋一空。但“遺產”比他們大部分人認為的要豐厚。
In spite of his promise, Mr Cameron's Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition governmentembarked on reforms that would reshape the NHS from the top down. The immense Healthand Social Care Act of 2012 increased competition, gave the service greater autonomy andput more decisions about the purchase of care in the hands of local doctors, known inBritainasgeneral practitioners, or GPs. The changes were so big that they could be seen from space,quipped Sir David Nicholson, the departing head of the NHS.
The government soon came to wish they would disappear. The reforms were never popularwith a bemused public. Doctors' groups argued they would lead to a more fragmented andprivatised system. Others worried that GPs would be incapable of commissioning care. EdMiliband, Labour's leader, dubbed the reforms Mr Cameron's “poll tax”, a reference to thepolicy that helped fell Margaret Thatcher. In this case it was Andrew Lansley, the healthsecretary, who fell. Less than six months after his reforms were passed, Mr Lansley wasreplaced by Jeremy Hunt, who talks about them as little as possible.
The health reforms were supposed to make the NHS more independent. Yet Mr Hunt nowstyles himself a patients' champion—he is known to ring hospitals to ask about waiting times.This is a concession to reality: politicians will always be held accountable for the performanceof the NHS. Still, the frantic smothering of the reforms conceals something useful. A policy thathas caused the government so much embarrassment is quietly bearing fruit.
The biggest change was the creation of 211 Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs), whichplaced about 60% of the NHS budget in the hands of local doctors and health workers. Theybecame responsible for procuring hospital care, mental-health services and the like. Navigatinga muddled system, the cannier ones have figured out ways to realign the incentives ofhospitals, which are often paid per procedure, with those of GPs, who aim to keep peoplehealthy and at home.
The commissioning group in Bedfordshire, for example, has bundled some 20 contracts formusculoskeletal care (treatment for things like weak knees and cracked hips) into one five-yearcontract that was won by Circle, a commercial health group. Far from fragmenting thesystem, as critics had feared, this has made Circle responsible for integrating the services oflocal providers. Patients will be told which are doing best. Circle and its partners must achievean agreed set of outcomes to receive some of their pay. Paolo Pieri, Circle's chief financial officer,expects the deal will not only improve care but save Bedfordshire some £30m($50m).
Not all commissioning groups are as bold. But perhaps a quarter are considering contracts likethe one in Bedfordshire, reckons Mr Pieri. Diane Bell, a doctor there, says more than 40 CCGshave contacted her group. “Every CCG I look at is doing brave and innovative work,” saysShane Gordon, who heads one inEssex.
The Labour Party—which launched a series of NHS reforms during its 13 years in power—saysthis sort of innovation was on the way anyway, and may have been delayed. Thanks to thegiant restructuring of the NHS “we lost two or three years”, says Andy Burnham, the shadowhealth secretary. He also criticises a regulatory regime that leaves many providers confused.Fair enough. But the reforms replaced bureaucrats with clinicians, which seems to haveencouraged creative thinking. Dr Bell was warned by an old hand that outcomes-basedcontracting would stir up a fight in her group. When she suggested it, though, the other GPsquickly bought in.
If Labour wins the next election, Mr Miliband might ground CCGs just as they are taking flight.Although he has no plans to restructure the NHS yet again, his laudable aim of integratinghealth and social care, which currently falls outside the NHS's remit, would probably shiftresponsibility to a different local body. Mr Burnham would also clip the wings of reformers bygiving NHS providers a built-in advantage in the competition for contracts.
But the biggest threat to CCGs and what some of them are doing to improve services is notpolitics but whether they can move fast enough to keep in front of a funding squeeze, saysThomas Cawston of Reform, a think-tank. Though the NHS has been protected from the worstof austerity, it could fall short by £30 billion by 2020—the result of rising demand from agrowing elderly population. Sir David warns that without more cash, the service could tip intothe red next year.
智囊團Thomas Cawston of Reform稱,對于臨床實驗組最大的威脅,以及其中部分改善服務所作的努力不是來自政治方面,而是他們是否可以發展的足夠快是實驗組一直保持在資金壓力前面。盡管NHS被最糟糕的財政緊縮保護,但其資金到2020年還不到300億英鎊,這是不斷增長的老齡人口日益增長的需求帶來的結果。戴維·尼克爾森爵士警告道,沒有更多的錢,這項服務明年就會陷入危機。
As money runs short, the real test will arrive. It could be an opportunity for health reformers.Or bureaucrats could panic and revert to old ways. Whatever happens, the next governmentwill not be able to duck the issue.