Letter: Future of NHS and care should be addressed

The Thatcher administration spent more cash in real terms on the NHS than any other government.

Aneurin Bevan was not an effective cabinet minister. The NHS was poorly set up. Adam Trimingham was quite right to point out how the General practitioners (GP) are private.

The Australian and French, amongst others, are systems superior to ours. Most of these are insurance based. There is no reason why such a system could not operate here.

It is wrong that people who do not contribute to the costs of healthcare should benefit.

Bureaucracy is a scourge of the modern age. Some administrative staff are always necessary.

Records, accounts and stock control have to be maintained.

But the vast levels seen today are a crippling drain on finances not just in health but also in government departments generally.

• READ MORE: 'Brighton is not Paradise, Adam, but Seaford is great'

Unions and others need to realise that the tax payer is a customer not a servant.

Unfortunately governments do not run things very well.

Any nationalized industry or service will be run for political reasons. The customer is secondary.

Strategically the long term future of health care needs to be addressed. We must look at the increased role of the private sector.

Care of elderly and other social care is going to be expensive.

Ever since the creation of the welfare state the Labour party has insisted that the Conservatives are pledged to destroy it. Any party which attempted this would face electoral meltdown. This naïve claim led to Ed Miliband's attempt to ‘weaponise’ health care.

Health should not be a political football. Dogma has played a part in its problems. Sensible open minded discussion regarding the future is necessary.

Richard J. Szypulski

Wiltshire House 

Brighton