With the local elections over, political attention is now firmly focused on the countdown to the General Election. Over the weekend the NHS figured prominently – with announcements on mental health services and inevitably NHS funding. Funding for health and care services can seem bewildering. The scale is huge – the NHS bill in England is almost £124bn in 2017/18. This represents 15% of all public spending. Future commitments for NHS spending are not marginal; they go to the heart of tax and spending policy.

There are three fundamental issues that any incoming government will need to address if health and social care are to be sustained.  First, it is clear that social care needs immediate attention from an incoming government. Social care is severely under-funded and unaffordable for people on low incomes who are ineligible for free care. The government is increasing spending on social care over the next three years, but that’s after a seven-year period that saw an 8% funding cut. The trouble is that pressures on the system are increasing at twice the rate of funding growth. This is partly due to additional need but also increases in the national living wage. The result is a social care funding gap of around £2.1bn by 2019/20.

Second, funding for the NHS in England needs to increase in the next two years. Spending on health care per person in England is planned to fall in real terms by 0.2% in 2018/19 and by a further 0.2% in 2019/20.The pressures on the health care system, combined with a struggling social care sector, mean it is difficult to see how the NHS can sustain quality and access to care for patients with this planned decrease in spending. The minimum option would to be maintain the level of NHS spending per person at a cost of £230m in 2018/19 and £450m in 2019/20. But this would still see health care falling as a share of GDP. A more generous, and arguably realistic, option, is to maintain the share of GDP, requiring an extra £1.4bn in 2018/19 and £2.9bn in 2019/20 for the English NHS in real terms.

The third issue is probably the hardest for the political system to address. Beyond 2020, the pace of funding growth for the NHS and social care system will need to accelerate, taking a greater share of GDP. This will be necessary to keep pace with the increasing and ageing population, rising chronic disease levels, to meet public expectations for health care and to fund new technologies and medical advances. The most authoritative estimates of the spending pressures facing the NHS and care system in the long term come from the Office of Budget Responsibility (OBR), stating that funding pressures will rise by over 4% a year in real terms in the next decade.

Health and social care are vital public services that all of us rely on in times of need. We’ve seen years of funding volatility – from feast to famine and back again – which is damaging for long-term planning and probably undermines efficiency. Short-term action on funding is necessary but not sufficient. The Health Foundation is calling for a new independent body, similar to the OBR, to assess the long-term financial needs for health and social care, as recommended by the House of Lords’ committee on sustainability.

Years of austerity have left the NHS and social care sector in an increasingly perilous financial state. Government funding plans are not keeping pace with demand and cost, and, as a result, these vital services are under serious strain. Whatever the outcome of the General Election, there are big challenges ahead for the health and care system. If we are to deliver the quality service people expect, funding will need to rise – not just in the short term – but year on year. Our social care system is widely recognised as inadequate and needs fundamental reform.

The scale of the funding required for the NHS might lead some to conclude that the health care system is fundamentally unaffordable. The evidence across the globe would not support that view. The NHS model is not broken; all the evidence is that a tax funded system has substantial advantages in terms of efficiency and fairness. But however efficient it is, the health service still has to be resourced properly. If we want the NHS to keep up with medical advances and meet the changing needs of an ageing population, spending will need to rise. This is a challenge all countries face. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has found that the funding pressures in the UK are towards the lower end of many health systems. While increasing funding will be difficult, it’s not impossible. Countries have devoted a growing share of national wealth to health care over the last 50 years. But how we raise additional funding raises new challenges when you consider intergenerational fairness and the squeeze on family finances: average real incomes are still below the peak of 2007. One thing is clear - cutting other public services is not the answer. The problems of delayed discharges from social care should have taught us that robbing Peter to pay Paul doesn’t work.

Anita Charlesworth is Director of Research and Economics at the Health Foundation.

This article was originally published in the HSJ on 9 May 2017.

Further reading


Dr Umesh Prabhu

Very well said Anita. NHS and Social care are two jewels in the crown of Great Britain! Some would question is Britain still a Great Britain? Once up on a time Great Britain ruled the world and sun never set on Great British Empire! Sadly the British Empire is no more, common-wealth friends are not so common and Europe 'we don;t know whether we are coming or going! So what happened and what has gone wrong?

NHS and social care simply reflects what is happening in our society. Approximately 3 Million people are employed by NHS and Social care, which is 1 in 10 people who are employed in Great Britain work either for NHS or social care!

Sadly when the Britain was an empire it was uni-cultural nation and almost all the population was White Anglo-Saxon! Today Britain is multi-cultural but sadly its leadership and culture is still uni-cultural! I sincerely request White Anglo-Saxon leaders (many are simply amazing human beings, kind, caring and compassionate) please look around you and you see most seniors and policy makers, head-hunters, solicitors, private consultancy firms and most decision makers are all White Anglo-saxon and mostly men. White women are doing much better compared to Black and Ethnic minority!

Until we get values, value based leadership and excellent governance and accountability in Public sector, we will not see any changes in NHS or social care! Please do not get me wrong, I have been Medical Director for 16 years in NHS and I am BME! I have met many wonderful people who respected and trusted me to do a good job and I am fortunate few! Sad reality is when BMEs become leaders they follow the same culture and become part of the club! This club culture is what is harming NHS and patients, staff and NHS is suffering and money is wasted in the NHS!

So it is not just giving more money is important but as Simon Stevens is planning to do, we got to transform health and social care together. We must also appoint right value based leaders, implement good governance and make staff, patient and public engagement as the norm.

NHS and social care does need more money but we must get the leadership, accountability, staff and patient engagement right! NHS has never been good at rewarding right people who work hard or getting rid of people who harm patients or provide poor care or behave badly because of club culture and old boys network. In such a culture patients, staff and NHS suffers and lot of money is wasted!

Health Foundation, King's Fund and Nuffield Trust and all must lead from the front and lead by example and look at your own inclusion and diversity and that too BMEs in senior leadership position. Leadership is all about leading from the front and leading by example and being a role model! Leader's job is simply to create a winning team and win!

Kevin Phillips

Please give self funders of care a tax break. Why should they continue to fund the gap? It has become impossible for the self funders. Self funders should not be paying more for their care than those who are funded by social services or health. It is not an equal system.

Add new comment

* indicates a required field

Your email address will not be published on the site and will only be used if we need to contact you about your comment.

View our comments policy