Why it is not healthy for democracy to have Brussels fix the NHS

Hugh

Actually I don't it is hypocritical to support the EU where it acts in the manner consistent with the way the UK was sold the idea of the common market, such as breaking down national barriers to the movement of goods and services. The objection on democratic grounds to the EU is usually that it tends to act in a manner for which it was never given a mandate by the British public.

Tommy Judd

"This is what the EU is all about: circumventing democratic debate". Now hang on. This proposal, which failed to emerge yesterday after a debate within the Commission, will go to the Council of Ministers for long and intense debate. There, national health ministers responsible to their cabinets and parliaments, will change, hone or block it. It will then go to the European Parliament where elected deputies will make changes at the behest of the health lobbies and then send it back. Then it will be re-debated by ministers and eventually - if we're very lucky indeed - become a law implemented according to the traditions of the national parliaments and health services. You can, if you like, say this favours the executive over the national legislature. But you cannot say this is an imposition or "circumventing democratic debate". If only.

Tiberius

Conscience, Fraser? Surely this is merely an example of getting on with the business of government.

Michael McGowan

Fraser, what's the big issue? This is simply the Single Market at work. I am pretty much all in favour of the Common Market. I thought that was the basis on which the UK entered the EU; voted yes in the Referendum in 1975; and passed the Single European Act. Bring it on: there is now a chance, just a chance, that we might in my lifetime see the end of the Stalinist monolith called the NHS.

Michael McGowan

This Directive lays bare the essentially Stalinist nature of the NHS. "Equity" in the NHS consist in forcing everyone to pay to be levelled down to a lowest common denominator policed by politicians, the unions and NICE. That will have to change significantly because the European approach to healthcare is radically different, far more liberal, is compatible with the Single Market and has better outcomes with universal access. Bring it on.

C Hope

EU Referendum has written an unmissable post about this proposal. See: http://tinyurl.com/ypszbq

A N Other

Hmmm... yes, a democratic debate (conducted entirely behind closed doors) at the end of which there will be a majority vote in which a UK Government which won the last election partly by hammering the Conservatives' patients passport will be outvoted... and forced to accept the same thing imposed via the EU. Actually in fairness they will probably be given some sop to save face. The bottom line is that if you want a patients passport scheme you can vote for it in a general election - or not. In the EU you won't get a choice. Its also blindingly obvious that this is the thin end of a very long wedge. If you don't want the EU to run health policy then don't go there.

Giles

Fraser, for your interest, your fast-switch attitude has attracted pretty exoriating attention over at the Economist. Hard not to agree with every word they say: http://www.economist.com/blogs/certainideasofeurope/2007/12/for_one_brief_moment_this.cfm

ExPat

I don't care about the EU. The EU has done nothing for me. But if I can say yah boo sucks to the NHS. And their MRSA-ridden wards. And their non-caring nurses. And their trolley-ridden corridors. Then I will. The Conservatives should have been in there first. Hello EU!

Fraser Nelson

Giles, do you really agree with every word of that Economist piece? It takes as its premise that I say the EU is all about "shifting the centre of political gravity leftwards in Europe" and then proceeds to rebut this concocted proposition. My point is that most EU regulation is to the left of the established practices IN BRITAIN. The Economist blogger right to say that EU regulations are a force for liberalisation in much of Europe. My point is that they ceased to become so in Britain at least ten years ago. So it depends which perspective you look at this from: CoffeeHouse views the world from a British one. It was an interesting piece though, even if it had - as you suggest - a striking number of insults (tho i guess anonymous internet commentators often do). Shame he/she wasted so much energy on a false premise.

David

The only reason that (some) NHS outcomes are inferior to (some of) the rest of Europe is that UK citizens pay less for healthcare. Low tax ideologues have persuaded British voters to resent paying. Every 'market-based' mechanism simply increases administration - these costs are far higher in insurance-based, refund systems. Pay-as-you earn, with free care at the point of delivery, has the lowest overheads. You can't win arguments just by using the word 'Stalinist' out of context you know...