Login FormClose

Free, fortnightly PIP, ESA and UC Updates

Over 80,000 claimants and professionals subscribe to the UK's leading source of benefits news.

 

Two of the government’s top health and work advisers believe the merits of prioritising NHS treatment for working people need to be seriously discussed.

The Department of Health (DoH) and Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) advisers acknowledged that one of the problems with returning people to work quickly was long NHS waiting lists causing delays in accessing treatment.

DoH expert adviser on health and work Professor Dame Carol Black suggested that a national debate needed to be held on the subject.

She agreed this would take the discussion around health and work into a "totally different space" but noted that working had many wide ranging benefits.

"I personally think we should perhaps be more honest and debate more fully if we would prioritise such patients if it was a question of getting them back to work," she said.

"We do prioritise certain conditions, absolutely we do, and of course we always said it was perfectly reasonable to prioritise cancer. But we have never had the really serious discussion of if this is about people's lives, their families, society and the economy, is there a case (you may say no) to say we should think in terms of prioritisation?”

Read the full story in Workplace Savings and Benefits

Comments  

+2 #10 lewis hc 2014-03-14 09:24
The Third Reich took Jews' rights away gradually but systematically until eventually they had no rights. The Third Reich was democratically elected too. This government is taking away sick and disabled folks' rights gradually but systematically.
Just a few years ago, witholding medical treatment from sick and disabled people (forget the 'prioritizing' word) would have been undiscussable in public in Britain.
We're going to end up with gas chambers within 5 to 10 years in this country if this government gets re-elected imo.
+3 #9 Bill24chev 2014-03-14 08:47
Its the sort of "Good Policy Idea" you would expect from neo-conservativ e Republlicans on the other side of the big pond.

Having said that a couple of years ago I remember an report of a speech by a Tory Councillor from I think South Yorkshire who advocated a return to the "work House"

I, am like many people disable partly because of previous employment so having done my bit I am now going to be treated like some kind o pariah

bill
+2 #8 rapheal 2014-03-13 22:16
the sick and unemployed? why stop there, look out pensioners, you may be next, you are not contributing to society i.e. working, and as we have an ageing population, think of the money that could be saved by this fascist government." abandon hope all ye who enter retirement".
Rapheal
+1 #7 Eli48 2014-03-13 22:05
Quote:
So in this new system where working people get priority over others, where do I stand as a carer? I have not 'worked' for 25 years, but have saved the state millions by keeping the person I care for out of the social care/nursing home system. So if I cannot get reasonably quick treatment because I don't 'work' the person I care for will have to go into hospital or a nursing home. So that's the logic properly worked out, then.
I thought caring for 35 hours a week (usually the minimum you do) was classed as work. I might be wrong.
+1 #6 Keith 2014-03-13 16:42
So in this new system where working people get priority over others, where do I stand as a carer? I have not 'worked' for 25 years, but have saved the state millions by keeping the person I care for out of the social care/nursing home system. So if I cannot get reasonably quick treatment because I don't 'work' the person I care for will have to go into hospital or a nursing home. So that's the logic properly worked out, then.
+1 #5 Eli48 2014-03-13 16:27
Quote:
Remind me, why was I paying 40% or more tax and then NI every year I was working? Ah yes, as a safety net and so I could access the NHS 'free at the point of access'.

I think we need to look more closely at really addressing those who take a 'holiday' in the UK, only for their pre-existing condition forces them into the NHS and with no means or intent to make a significant contribution to their care costs.

Economic immigrants and others who have elected not to make a contribution to our social care systems since they arrived in the UK should also need to pay for/towards the costs of their care. Maybe the habitual unemployed should be made to contribute.

The sooner someone in Whitehall wakes up and realises that outsourcing doesn't and shouldn't save any money, it merely moves people off the payroll onto a different cost base. Atos et-al are milking the system to such a degree that any true savings they could contribute are exceeded by the fees they are paid.
Mr Bull, I I was with you right up until you made the comment, 'maybe the habitual unemployed should be made to contribute.' That kind of comment serves no one least of all you. It heaps more scorn and ridicule on the most vulnerable in society. It also smacks of 'government propaganda/rhet oric' that frankly we could do without. This is not a forum for benefit bashing thank you. The unemployed are trying to survive on very little, as I am, e.g. £71 a week and I am really struggling. How much longe3r I will have internet access and phone, I am not sure. But, they should NOT be made to contribute. They have already contributed via their taxes and NI contributions. They also contribute to other taxes for goods and services. Being unemployed is not habitual, thank you very bloody much. Shame on you.
#4 David Ball 2014-03-13 14:50
Remind me, why was I paying 40% or more tax and then NI every year I was working? Ah yes, as a safety net and so I could access the NHS 'free at the point of access'.

I think we need to look more closely at really addressing those who take a 'holiday' in the UK, only for their pre-existing condition forces them into the NHS and with no means or intent to make a significant contribution to their care costs.

Economic immigrants and others who have elected not to make a contribution to our social care systems since they arrived in the UK should also need to pay for/towards the costs of their care. Maybe the habitual unemployed should be made to contribute.

The sooner someone in Whitehall wakes up and realises that outsourcing doesn't and shouldn't save any money, it merely moves people off the payroll onto a different cost base. Atos et-al are milking the system to such a degree that any true savings they could contribute are exceeded by the fees they are paid.
+4 #3 Eli48 2014-03-12 17:47
Quoting Puccalove:
It wouldn't surprise me if the next thing they come up with is only tax payers are allowed to vote!


How very true, but I think workhouses are next for the poor, sick, disabled.... and possibly the elderly. The government are already putting into place residential work placements with private companies.
+5 #2 Puccalove 2014-03-12 15:05
It wouldn't surprise me if the next thing they come up with is only tax payers are allowed to vote!
+6 #1 Eli48 2014-03-12 11:12
So those who work and pay taxes have value and worth, and those not working and paying taxes, have neither. Typical government propaganda of which the DWP are part of. As soon as I saw the DWP were involved, I knew I was right. It does not surprise me that this vile government are plumbing new depths. Any further and they will be able to dig a hole to France.

You need to be logged in to comment