Eva Cassidy Songbird

The Beatles Revolver

Joni Mitchell Blue

Steely Dan Aja

Stevie Wonder Innervisions

Fleetwood Mac Rumours

The Beatles Abbey Road

Radiohead The Bends

The Police Reggatta de Blanc

Prince & The Revolution Purple Rain

Further evidence of why politicians should get out of the NHS management business. Hazel Blears has been made to look a fool in recent days. Her recent decision to join a protest outside her local hospital was remarkable. As a likely consequence of this decision the health debate continues a pace. Today’s Observer includes two articles about the NHS: one about its failings and the other about the apparent opportunity that this political failure gives the Conservatives.

So what of this opportunity?

The sight of Ms Blears on a ‘picket line’ must have warmed the hearts of most Conservatives this festive season. The old-fashioned image and hypocrisy on display was manna from heaven for us Tories. Despite a recent doubling of the annual spend on the NHS, the Labour Party Chair found herself obligated to “defend” her local hospital. Significant increases in NHS spending leading to no discernible improvement in NHS performance. Who would have thought of that outcome five years ago? Well, I did. As did many doctors. And yet the spin now is that doctors’ income, in particular that of GPs, is the reason why the NHS is in the position it is. Funnily enough, doctors are not too happy about this.

Bashing doctors has become Labour’s latest wheeze to distract the electorate from the real reasons why billions of their pounds have done nothing to improve their local health services. Yes, there have been some improvements, mainly of the cosmetic kind. The problem is, however, that I still find myself advising my patients of the length of hospital waiting times, the poor availability of physiotherapy services and the cost implications of certain drug regimens. The reality is that the money has primarily gone on services and infrastructure that will not improve day-to-day healthcare delivery. The vast amount of money spent on the patient records project and the obscene amount of money spent on management consultancy fees are just two examples of where our billions have gone. What about that Ms Blears?

Despite Labour’s woes, the Conservative Party has to tread carefully when it comes to health. In the 1980s the Labour Party carefully created an inaccurate image of nasty Tories planning to destroy the NHS. The majority of the staff at the time swallowed that unfair representation hook, line and sinker. What do they think now? Most doctors I speak to are very critical of the present government. The GPs, though acknowledging their recent pay increase, are exasperated by the daily need to collect pointless patient data. The hospital doctors are dealing with increasing uncertainty about their careers, an increase in uncertainty that did not exist under the Tories a decade ago. So yes, there is an opportunity for us Tories if the right decisions are taken.

I believe that the Conservative Party should get out of the healthcare business. The depoliticisation and localisation of healthcare delivery have to be the central themes of our health policy. Local hospitals should be answerable to local people. We should even consider the possibility of legislating for an optional local healthcare levy. That way, people would see where their money goes, and just as importantly, see how much healthcare actually costs.

The Labour Party’s experience of managing the NHS since 1997 should teach us all one lesson: whatever a political party commits to spending on the NHS it will never be enough to assuage the public demand for more. The Conservatives must remember that the NHS swallows votes as well as money.

most of our people have never had it so good

Today is the twentieth anniversary of the death of the former Conservative Prime Minister, Harold Macmillan. The man who saw action in the First World War went on to show strong opposition to the appeasement of Hitler in the 1930s. He was Prime Minister of this country from 1957 until 1963. His political career spanned a difficult time in the history of this country, as Britain absorbed the reality of a fading Empire. He often handled this well such as with his “Winds of Change” speech, but he also occasionally supported misguided attempts to impose ‘Imperial’ will, most notably during the Suez crisis. Over that affair Harold Wilson infamously described him as ‘First in, First out’. Throughout his political life, however, his sense of duty and service to his country was never in doubt.

The Suffolk murders have highlighted the powers and consequent dangers of a ’24-hour news media’. Within hours of the arrest of the suspect one could obtain a remarkable amount of detail about him. Like many people, he had a My Space site (now removed). The details from there were posted swiftly on major national news websites. We now know his age, sexuality and appearance. We even know his favourite cartoon character and the fact that he enjoys listening to Canon in D Major by Johann Pachelbel. What we do not know is whether or not he is guilty of the murders of the five women in Ipswich.

Yesterday’s Sunday Mirror led with the following headline. In fact, even now you can still listen to the interview. Today, the BBC made the decision to broadcast an audio recording of an interview the suspect voluntarily gave to them on December 11th. He gave it to them confidentially as ‘background’ information for their reports on the horrific crimes. Last week, ITN chillingly interviewed Paula Clennell just 48 hours before she went missing and was murdered. Have these media organisations behaved responsibility? Are they prejudicing any future court case? Do they care?

All news outlets are under pressure to get the scoop, to get the different angle, the different picture, the different interview. The pressures to do this have become much greater since the advent of ’24 hour news’ programming. By one measure, the BBC and Sunday Mirror have been successful. However, I am not convinced that their decisions to run with these “scoops” were as influenced by legal ramifications and the good of society, as they were by ratings and sales. It must be in the best of interests of British society that British justice is seen to be done. I cannot see any ‘public interest’ in a trial collapsing because of insensitive and mis-guided journalism.

This suspect is presently innocent. The man is on record as having strenously denied any involvement in the Suffolk murders. Indeed, there are reports this evening that other prostitutes are unconvinced that the police have the right man. Whether this suspect is guilty or not misses the point. When a person (or persons) is charged with the murders of these unfortunate women he (they) should be allowed a fair trial. The ‘Fourth Estate’ has a responsibility to ensure that this happens. Part of the foundation of our society is the principle of innocent until proven guilty. We should cherish and defend that principle twenty-four hours a day.