The crisis in the NHS is overwhelming this week. It has reminded me of conversations I had with my late father on how to manage within the state sector. I think they're worth sharing.

My father worked for the nationalised electricity industry from the late 1940s to late 1980s. He spent much of that time as a fairly senior engineer. He was committed to what he did. He believed electricity supply was a human right. And he sought to delver it.
He left the industry and retired when he realised that privatisation challenged what the believed in. The priority was no longer supply. It was, instead, profit. He had a clear example of the difference this made. It was about emergency management.
In his day the state electricity boards ensured that they had all the capacity they needed to manage emergencies to keep supply going as well as possible, come what may. It meant there was excess capacity. But it wasn't wasted - maintenance and training was done instead.
Privatisation saw that excess as waste, and it went. It was assumed contracts could buy in support when needed. My father believed that was dangerous - because when demand was strongest the most inexperienced people would be put to work on the job.
We can see the same logic now in the NHS. Instead of having capacity to deal with an emergency a decade of cuts have delivered a survive reduced to the most basic level possible. And what we've seen is that outsourcing cannot make up the slack. And that is dangerous.
The NHS is now being overwhelmed. Coronavirus was predictable - and predicted. What was also predictable was that an NHS with reduced beds, staff, equipment and even training because of a lack of slack to let it happen would not be able to cope. And that's happening.
People are going to die now, because of a failed management ideology - that lower cost is always best when what is at stake is the supply of essential public services. So, some questions are appropriate.
Were the tax cuts to big business and the well off worth the deaths we are now seeing from coronavirus?
Was the goal of a balanced budget worth having people die for?
Could we have done better by committing to a universally high standard of basic public services - supplied by an integrated NHS?
Will we learn the lesson now and provide a properly resourced, staffed and trained NHS in the future?
Are people still going to have to die in pursuit of an economic dogma that puts profit before people, and cutting government spending above people's lives?
This is not the time to delay asking these questions. This is the time to ask them. Now is when we have to decide. We need commitment to care, not commitment to cutting deficits, and we need it now. It's time for politicians to deliver that, now.

More from Richard Murphy

There is a growing and numbing realisation of just how bad Sunak's budget really was. Worse, he’s even now saying that there is nothing he can do about poverty. This is a long thread to explain why he’s failing and what we can do about it if we want to change our politics.

For those who don’t want to read a long Twitter thread there is a blog version here.
https://t.co/AuTdAr1f1n if you want a summary of the whole thread it’s this: the neoliberal thinking that all our main political parties subscribe to is now bankrupt. We need something new now.

Sunak faced a challenge this week. A winning Chancellor has to decide how to secure the support their party needs to win elections. In that case there will always be winners and losers in a budget. So Sunak had to make decisions.

However, it’s fair to say that decisions are always constrained. No budget has, I suspect, ever delivered precisely the policies any Chancellor has really wanted. That’s because all politicians are fantasists and reality has to be addressed as well in any budget.

The overwhelming realities that Sunak needed to address yesterday were really not hard to spot. First, there was the real economic chaos created by shortages in the economy. These are the result of Covid, Brexit and now war, but which heavily pre-dated the last.

More from Government

Canada is failing to act on Climate Change. @wef @WorldBank @IMFNews @IPCC_CH @UNDPGAIN @AntiCorruptIntl @Pontifex @JustinWelby @OCCRP @StopCorpAbuse @TaxJusticeNet @FairTaxCanada @ecojustice_ca @WCELaw @CanEnvLawAssn @envirodefence @IBA_Canada #cdnpoli


Covid recovery money is going to the oligarchy.

Ottawa and the provinces have put very little on the table to help clean-tech companies directly during Covid 19 while targeting fossil-fuel producers with more than $16 billion in aid.

Coast to coast people have demanded treaties be honored. We demanded climate action, divestment and land back but Canada is not listening. This video shows 10 years of rallies in Waterloo Ontario. City & regional council declared a climate emergency. 🚨

The Bank of China (BOC), SNC-Lavalin and WE Charity were recipients of taxpayer-funded the Covid 19 Canadian Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS)

You May Also Like

I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x


The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x

Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x

The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x

It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x