The Government is currently consulting on one aspect of the funding formula for local NHS provision, a change which I believe would be in the short and long term detriment to people in East Lancashire.
Jeremy Hunt wants to make a change which would result in a redistribution of money away from poorer areas with lower life expectancies (such as Hyndburn) towards (generally wealthier, southern) areas with higher life expectancies. The Government’s thinking is that older people need more NHS money, which taken at face value makes sense. However, in practice that means taking money away from people who have lower life expectancies, rewarding healthier people with better health provision.
Ignoring health inequality and favouring age will put further strain on the budget of the NHS in East Lancashire, the result of which would be less in the way of services.
When is a cut not a cut? When it is a redistribution from poorer areas of health need to areas where people live longer.