Tory plan to 'hive off' NHS

Scan page 14

Even the limited growth of private medicine so far has harmed the health service for the majority. How could the NHS be made a aal socialist alternative to private medicine? THE SCRAPPING of the National Health Service and its replacement with private health insurance schemes. An end to state funding of universities and colleges - with the introduction of fees of around £12,000 for the average three year course. And an end to the link between pensions and other social security payments and inflation.

These are the latest suggestions for cuts in public spending and privatisation being kicked around by the head-banging rightwingers On the Tory cabinet.

They are among propos als put forward by the Tory 'think tank' , the Central Policy Review Staff. According to the Economist magazine, which leaked detaile of the plant ets so horrified the among Thatcher's ministEven the limited growth so far has harmed the he majority. How could the real socialist alternative Martin Thomas reports. Some Tories want to make a clean sweep of it and scrap the NHS altogether. Harry Sloan reports.

ers that they blocked discussion of the CPRS paper at the September 9 cabinet The objective of the CPRS is to reduce the proportion of the country's Gross Domestic Product allocated to state spending - and of course to maximise the proportion which finds its way into the pockets of the ruling class and their pampered errandboys in the upper managerial sector.

The Tories are concerned that even after the wholesale public service cutbacks, government spending is set to consume at least 45% of GDP for the of private medicine alth service for the : NHS be made a to private medicine? foreseeable future.

In fact the 45% figure is a fraud. It is calculated by comparing total public expenditure (including 'transfer payments' like pensions and benefits) with a GDP figure that excludes transfer payments. The actual proportion of the national product which is produced by or directly for the state is twenty-odd per cent.

Chunk

But state spending still takes a big chunk of the social surplus product -what is left for profits, interest, rent, etc. after materials and wages have been paid for. And that is what the Tories are really worried about.

A major element of their worry is, paradoxically, the impact of Thatcher's three or four million unemployed, who can make no substantial contribution to government revenue, but cost thousands of millions of pounds in benefits.

Since the CPRS knows better than to presume a substantial increase in employment, it is forced to consider desperate measures to cut back government spending. The four biggest areas of expenditure are education, social security, health and defence.

Defence of course is a sacred Tory cow, and no serious proposals are put forward for cuts.

But education is a different kettle of fish. The Tory rich of course do not use the state education system in any event. They send their kids to private schools.

So the CPRS toy with the idea of scrapping state primary and secondary schooling altogether. That would save a lot of money (!), they say, but. (they reluctantly conclude) it would create political difficulties.

Higher education however might be easier, they feel: the introduction of fees could be combined with a tokenistic system of 300,000 state scholarships - and the provision of loans for students without scholarships.

With well over 100,000 graduates already on the dole, the deterrent effect on students of replacing grants with loans is obvious: only kids from the wealthiest families would go on to higher education - heralding cuts greater than we have ever seen.

On top of this the CPRS recommends allowing the teacher pupil ratio to rise.

On social security payments, the CPRS again recognises that these benefit only the working class and not the rich: they resent every penny going to claimants and pensioners. They recomme that big savings could made by leaving the payments to lag behi inflation.

The privatisation of NHS could, they arg save £3-4 billion every y out of the £10 billion her budget. This bonus cor on top, of course, of windfall profits that wo be reaped by private ins ance firms and wealthy shareholders particularly if the CI recommendation of statutory minimum le