Search

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 an essay on the commissioning of general practitioners and reforms within Great Britain's National Health Service and on the impact the reforms and commissioning will have on British patients. The challenges of commissioning and the financial and legal risks associated with commissioning are examined.

Greenham and Crookham Commons is an unusual place to think about enclosure, given that it was not historically enclosed like many places that surround it. But Greenham, to give it its shorthand term, has an extraordinary late modern history attached to it, and it is that history that forms the basis of this contribution--describing enclosure more as social construct than a physical act, although the physicality of enclosure at Greenham was real for those directly affected by it. In addition to a short contextual essay, the contribution is unusual in another respect: it incorporates a photographic journey, following the fence that once enclosed the Cold War airbase at Greenham. Based on a series of memory walks, the images describe what happened when peace women and others revisited the commons to (re)trace some of their journeys around the base. The series of photographs that emerged from this project constitute: a blurring of past and present; a contemporary mapping of the site by those for whom the fence was a constant presence; and a search for shapes of the past in conflict with the present contours of Greenham. The photographs form part of an ongoing larger film work asking whether the divisions of the past are still embedded in the present and how enclosure is represented at Greenham today, as physical and mental barriers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author discusses the influence of corporate industries on health policy regulations in Great Britain. She provides examples from the tobacco and food industry to demonstrate the government's ineptitude in policy making. One of the reasons for this cited by the author is that regulatory agencies are often funded by the industry. Also, regulations are often projected by industries as expensive and unfeasible. Industries often resort to third-party advocacy to subvert regulation. INSET: OVERSEEING THE REVOLVING DOOR.

The article reports almost all of the British National Health Service (NHS) budget will be spent in a competitive market with competitive tendering by "qualified providers," following the passage of the Health and Social Care Bill. It is noted that to compile successful bids, legal, financial and operational expertise is required. It is mentioned that as part of the austerity programme, many charities have been forced to close after the withdrawal of government funding.

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.