Search

Reforms to the British National Health Service introduce major changes to how health care will be delivered. The core elements include the creation of new purchaser organizations, Clinical Commissioning Groups, which unlike their predecessors will be able to recruit and reject general practices and their patients without geographical restriction. The Clinical Commissioning Groups are to transition from statutory bodies to freestanding organizations, with most of their functions privatized and an increasingly privatized system of provision. In this paper, we explore the likely consequences of these proposals, drawing in particular on the experience of managed care organizations in the United States, whose approach has influenced the English proposals extensively. We argue that the wrong lessons are being learned and the English reforms are likely to fundamentally undermine the principles on which the British National Health Service was founded. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Conservative-led government in the United Kingdom is embarking on massive changes to the National Health Service in England. These changes will create a competitive market in both purchasing and provision. Although the opposition Labour Party has stated its intention to repeal the legislation when it regains power, this may be difficult because of provisions of competition law derived from international treaties. Yet there is an alternative, illustrated by the decision of the devolved Scottish government to reject competitive markets in health care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers authors' view on the history of the reform that aimed to introduce private sector involvement throughout the NHS. The goal of health and social care bill is also discussed. The authors refer to Alain Enthovens' comments in favour of NHS, being less expensive than Health Maintenance Organisation HMO model. With time, the corporate sector will price open the NHS oyster.

The article presents the authors' view on the impact of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) on the government agency the National Health Services (NHS). Topics discussed include the authors' assessment of the TTIP trade agreement and an account of the trade dispute between the governments of Austria and Slovakia which shows the important issues that are related to the TTIP trade agreement.

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article ""Any willing provider" vs "any qualified provider" in the NHS reform: different bottle, same contents," by L. Reynolds in a previous issue.

The authors discuss the impact of the Health and Social Care Bill of 2011 on the National Health Service (NHS) in England. They note the bill's movement toward eliminating the NHS through the British Parliament, and facilitating the introduction of a U.S.-style health system. Moreover, the authors cite significant legal consequences of Bill which include weakening the accountability of the Secretary of State to Parliament for the provision of services to patients in the NHS.