Skip to content
IEA InfoIEA Info
  • About Us
    • Who we are
      • Staff
      • Trustees
      • Advisory Council
      • Academic Advisory Council
      • Fellows and Academic Advisors
      • Nobel Prize Winning Economists
      • IEA Award Winners
    • What We Do
    • FAQs
    • Contact Us
    • Careers
      • Jobs
  • Digital
  • Research
    • Publications
    • Economic Affairs
    • EA Magazine
    • Shadow Monetary Policy Committee
    • Peer Review Protocol
  • Blog
  • Media
    • Press Releases
    • In The Media
    • Media Enquiries
  • Students
  • International
    • Initiative for African Trade and Prosperity
    • EPICENTER
    • Translations
    • IEA Primers
  • Donate
    • Donate Now
    • Corporate Partnerships
    • Donate to IEA Projects
    • IEA Book Club
    • Patreon
    • Other Ways to Donate
    • Legacy Gift
    • Donate from USA
    • Contact Us
  • Events
    • Past Events
  • Home
  • About
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Epicenter
  • Contact Us
Healthcare

It’s healthcare, not the NHS that matters

Philip Booth
13 April 2015

SUGGESTED

previous
Tax and Fiscal Policy

Low rates and flat taxes – why are we avoiding tax reform?

10 April 2015
next
Tax and Fiscal Policy

On tax and spending, the voters are right: Our politicians are all the same

14 April 2015
latest
Economic Theory

Do market mechanisms have a role to play in national defence?

4 December 2023
The Catholic Bishops’ General Election advice called on Catholics to support a “robust National Health Service on which we can all rely”. This is something of an about-turn. When the NHS was formed, the then Catholic Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Bernard Griffin, fought for and obtained exemptions from nationalisation for the small number of Catholic hospitals. He argued that it would be a ‘sad day for England when charity becomes the affair of the state’. The number of Catholic hospitals remains tiny and any significant expansion is currently out of the question.

Nigel Lawson once described the NHS as the nearest thing we have to a national religion; and it seems to have become an item of faith in the English and Welsh ‘branch’ of the universal Church. But, before joining the adulation, it is worth just pausing for a moment and considering that no Catholic country has adopted a model where only the state both finances and provides healthcare. Indeed, not only have no Catholic countries copied the British model, only Canada and Iceland in the whole developed world have done so.

Catholic social teaching is pretty clear that all should have healthcare as one of the basic goods necessary for a dignified living. Vatican II document, Gaudium et spes, stated: “The demands of the common good…are strictly connected to respect for and the integral promotion of the person and his fundamental rights [These include] the provision of essential services to all, some of which are at the same time human rights: food, housing, work, education and access to culture, transportation, basic health care…”. But, how healthcare is provided and financed should be a matter of prudent judgement and we should consider the other principles of Catholic social teaching in thinking about this matter.

In general, the Church has maintained that the promotion of the common good requires a large degree of economic freedom and that families have the right to plan their own economy. This should be underpinned by a strong ethical culture in which families choose what is good. Civil society, Church institutions and many other organisations within society can aid the family in this regard, especially in the provision of complex services such as healthcare or education.

The role of the state is to ensure provision of essential goods where, for some reason, they are not otherwise provided and to help and support families and other institutions rather than displace their role. The Church has articulated this vision very clearly in the field of education. Parental rights, and the rights of the Church and civil society to educate children are upheld very strongly. It has to be said that there is less discussion of these issues in the case of healthcare, but this area is no less important.

In the UK, we are not used to the idea that the provision of healthcare can involve choices. As my father used to say to me as a child at meal times, “you get what you’re given”. But there are very real choices that can be made. We spend 10 per cent of national income on healthcare and this is not just a case of procuring a fixed set of services that cannot be varied. For example, choices can, in principle, be made, between large, specialised hospitals that might provide better treatment at the technical level and small, local hospitals that might provide a more caring and intimate atmosphere. We can choose between invasive treatments to add a few months to life expectation and better care for the dying. The list of trade-offs is never ending. It might be tempting to think we can have the best of everything, but we can’t. In the NHS, these choices are made at the political level. In most countries, at least to some extent, they are made by families when choosing how they are going to be insured.

More profoundly, there are important moral choices involved in the provision of healthcare. We may prefer that abortion is banned by law, but, if it is legal, we surely should be able to choose a healthcare provider which applies Christian virtues and values to care at the beginning and end of life and in relation to so-called sexual and reproductive services. This is possible, but not in the UK. In Germany, for example, many hospitals are owned by religious groups.

Most continental countries have social insurance systems through which families can choose between insurers that use different models of health provision and the state’s role is supportive and to help pay the premiums for the less-well-off.

Of course, the assumption is that, if we did not have the NHS, we would not have healthcare. Visions of a distorted version of outcomes in the US are conjured up where – it is alleged – people are left untreated on the streets. This is a straw man. Nobody, on either side of the debate, wishes to move to a US-style system. There are, though, plenty of healthcare systems around the world which provide families with greater autonomy whilst ensuring that healthcare is available for all. All EU countries, with the exception of Belgium and Luxembourg have close to 100 per cent healthcare coverage but do not have a system like the NHS. These systems also tend to have much better outcomes, and the suggestion that this is due to higher levels of spending is not generally true. We do die younger because of the NHS.

It is probably the case that British Christians cling on to the NHS on the ground that it promotes equality. There are certainly more important values in Catholic social teaching than equal outcomes but, even here, the NHS has no great story to tell. There tends to be equality of opportunity to access healthcare services – and that is why the NHS tends to do well in the much-quoted Commonwealth Fund study. However, the NHS is only about average when it comes to equality of out-turn as measured by life expectancy across different income groups and so on. On the other hand, the decentralised social insurance systems of Germany, Holland and Switzerland are three of the best in the developed world.

In Centesimus annus, Pope Saint John Paul II talked about how the state had taken over the functions of society, especially in the case of welfare. One hundred years earlier, Pope Leo XIII had talked about the importance of societies of mutual aid that were developing in the industrialised world and how the state should not interfere with them. They were right.

Our Bishops would also have been right to argue that access to healthcare for all should be an election issue. But, there are many ways in which this can be achieved, and the preservation of the NHS itself is not a defining issue for Catholics. Civil society, the Church, mutual societies and other forms of non-state organisations could play a key role in the provision of healthcare. This would enable all families to have more freedom about this sensitive and intimate issue, and also allow Catholics to make choices that were in accordance with their consciences.

This article was first published in the Catholic Universe.

Philip Booth
Philip Booth is Senior Academic Fellow at the Institute of Economic Affairs. He is also Director of the Vinson Centre and Professor of Economics at the University of Buckingham and Professor of Finance, Public Policy and Ethics at St. Mary’s University, Twickenham. He also holds the position of (interim) Director of Catholic Mission at St. Mary’s having previously been Director of Research and Public Engagement and Dean of the Faculty of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences. From 2002-2016, Philip was Academic and Research Director (previously, Editorial and Programme Director) at the IEA. From 2002-2015 he was Professor of Insurance and Risk Management at Cass Business School. He is a Senior Research Fellow in the Centre for Federal Studies at the University of Kent and Adjunct Professor in the School of Law, University of Notre Dame, Australia. Previously, Philip Booth worked for the Bank of England as an adviser on financial stability issues and he was also Associate Dean of Cass Business School and held various other academic positions at City University. He has written widely, including a number of books, on investment, finance, social insurance and pensions as well as on the relationship between Catholic social teaching and economics. He is Deputy Editor of Economic Affairs. Philip is a Fellow of the Royal Statistical Society, a Fellow of the Institute of Actuaries and an honorary member of the Society of Actuaries of Poland. He has previously worked in the investment department of Axa Equity and Law and was been involved in a number of projects to help develop actuarial professions and actuarial, finance and investment professional teaching programmes in Central and Eastern Europe. Philip has a BA in Economics from the University of Durham and a PhD from City University.


1 thought on “It’s healthcare, not the NHS that matters”

  1. D.R. Myddelton
    Posted 13/04/2015 at 13:40 | Permalink

    Many years ago (46, if you must know), in a pamphlet on Denationalization, I wrote: ‘The welfare state is an irresponsible society because it separates in people’s minds the concept of getting benefits from the concept of paying for them.’ I have never quite managed to subscribe fully to Dr. Johnson’s well-known saying: ‘Read over your compositions and where ever you meet with a passage which you think is particularly fine, strike it out.’ Sometimes, as in this case, one’s composition may indeed be ‘particularly fine’. In the middle of a general election campaign that can certainly be described as ‘irresponsible’, we can all see the folly of the philosophy (or at least the practice) of the welfare state. It is unsustainable; and those of us who are getting on in years can feel comforted by the thought that we are unlikely to survive long enough to see the denouement. Those who rail against letting ‘the market’ anywhere near the provision of health services should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves and their ignorance. By seeking to rule out the market, they are eschewing the use of the most powerful means of improving the lot of mankind ever discovered, namely the process which uses changeable prices both as incentives for producers and as signals for consumers, which employs competition and trial and error as what Hayek called ‘a discovery procedure’ to see what works best and which comprises voluntary deals from which both supplier and user normally expect to benefit.

Comments are closed.


SHARE

Follow IEA on Twitter Like IEA on Facebook Connect with IEA on LinkedIn

SIGN UP FOR IEA EMAILS


The IEA is an educational charity and free market think tank.

Our mission is to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and expounding the role of the markets in solving economic and social problems. Given the current economic challenges facing Britain and the wider global environment, it is more vital than ever that we promote the intellectual case for a free economy, low taxes, freedom in education, health and welfare and lower levels of regulation.

About the IEA Donate
  • About Us
  • Staff
  • What We Do
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact Us
  • Donate Now
  • Publications
  • In The Media
  • Press Release
  • Media Enquiries
Newsletter signup
Keep in touch with the IEA
  • Donate
  • Like
  • Follow
  • Watch
  • Follow

Copyright © Institute of Economic Affairs | REGISTERED IN ENGLAND 755502, CHARITY NO. CC/235 351, LIMITED BY GUARANTEE

XWe use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However you may visit Cookie Settings to provide a controlled consent.
Read More
REJECTCookie settings
ACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled

Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.

Advertisement

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.

Performance

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

Analytics

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

Functional

Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.

Uncategorized

Undefined cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet.

Save & Accept
Powered by CookieYes