Two major policy initiatives that Labour are likely to take into the next General Election were announced yesterday. 

The Prime Minister put his weight behind an NHS restructuring that would, amongst other things, see the closure of many A&E units. All papers provide extensive coverage (though it has been knocked off the front pages generally by speculation over the Pre Budget Report).  That the Telegraph is so lukewarm signals that the Government have a long way to go to win this argument:

"...the common-sense objection to this plan remains: the most sophisticated treatments will be of little use to a patient who has died before he arrives at hospital."

The Telegraph

Many people's experiences of A&Es - especially if they attend at the most critical times - are far from perfect.  But the sense of reassurance that people gain from being within striking distance of their local A&E will be more of a critical factor in the debate than the promises of superior care that accompany them.

Education is the other area that policy proposals now look set to become election pledges in the future.  The proposals contained in Lord Leitch's review of skills suggests, again amongst other things, that we should gradually raise the period of being in compulsory education or training to 18.  (See The Guardian, The Telegraph or The Times)

As this is one of Gordon Brown's own commissioned reports this will probably have more legs than the Tomlinson Report - which covered some of the same ground and was quickly dumped.

"Education for all till 18" from one side sounds like almost as interesting election slogan as "Save our A&E."

The Telegraph

Also in today's news

• Vince Cable develops the idea of independence for our financial institutions further in an article in The Financial Times.
  
• The Indepdendent reports that sales of 4x4s have fallen for the first time for 10 years both here and in the US - a reaction to policy or public opinion?

Jamie Whyte in the Times today makes a provocative case for political apathy. 

Democracy is required to defend our liberty and prosperity. When the people cannot remove a government, it is sure to descend into despotism, corruption and inefficiency. But we should not confuse our love of democracy with a love of voting and other forms of political engagement. Political engagement is worthwhile only when there are political problems.

Jamie Whyte - The Times

Also in today's news...

• Ultra-low turnouts in recent NHS trust elections have been put under the spotlight by Lib Dem health spokesperson, Steve Webb.

"These figures show Tony Blair's pledge to put local people in charge of his new foundation hospitals is just another New Labour sham," he said. "How can the Government claim that the health concerns of millions of people are being properly represented when only a tiny handful of people vote in these elections?"

The Telegraph

• The Arch-Bishop of York, Dr John Sentamu, gets wide coverage for his interview where he complains about BBC bias - something our friends at 18 Doughty Street will be interested. 

• The 'big beasts' of contemporary politics lock horns over terror in most papers - but the FT do quite a good job of outlining the contenders.  Morland's cartoon in The Times sums up the issue most succinctly.
  

   Widely reported today was the formal unveiling of the Conservative party’s proposal of an independent board for the National Health Service. Mr Cameron, speaking alongside his health spokesman Andrew Lansley, insisted it was time to “move away from the idea that the Government's role is to micro-manage the delivery of health care and moving towards greater professional responsibility for those who work in the NHS."

   The reception for Cameron’s first concrete policy proposal since promising to make the NHS his priority at the party conference has been encouraging. Rosie Winterton, minister of state for health, said that the idea was "worth looking at". The Telegraph noticed it “sounded uncannily like the plan put forward by Gordon Brown only a few weeks before.”

   However, Steve Webb the Liberal Democrat Health spokesman has joined other experts in questioning the wisdom of introducing an extra level of bureaucracy that is devoid of accountability. He is quoted in the Financial Times: "We should not be handing power over to an unelected quango - independent of politicians, but accountable to no one,"

     Many people would agree with the sentiment that politicians should be less involved with the day to day running of NHS, which is best left up to the health professionals who understand these challenges, through a lifetime of working within the system. Yet Steve Webb is absolutely correct to question whether Cameron’s proposal (or Brown’s before it)  is the best means to facilitate this administrative shift.