THE Vote Leave’s argument that Brexit would boost the NHS has been “demolished”, claimed the Remain campaign, after Simon Stevens, the head of the NHS in England, spoke out in favour of Britain staying in the EU.
The health care chief said any extra pressure on the health service from migration was outweighed by the benefits of EU membership, noting how some of the NHS’s 130,000 European doctors, nurses and care workers could quit the service in the wake of a Brexit because of uncertainty over work visas.
"Yes, there's a perfectly legitimate argument to be had on these topics but from the NHS's perspective it is pretty clear that the balance of the advantage is such that the risks would be greater were we to find ourselves in economic downturn, were we to find a number of our nurses and doctors leaving,” said Mr Stevens.
He added: "Indeed, if the pound were affected because a lot of the drug treatments that we buy are priced in euros and dollars...that could make it more difficult for us to get the treatments we need at an affordable price."
The Stronger In campaign said the Leave camp’s central NHS argument - that the health service would be better funded and so stronger if the UK left Europe – had been “blown out the water” by Mr Stevens’s remarks.
Jeremy Hunt, England’s Health Secretary, said: "A strong NHS needs a strong economy and our economy will be stronger if we remain in Europe.”
But Lord Owen, the former Labour Foreign Secretary who supports Brexit, accused Mr Stevens of making a "very considerable mess" of the NHS and said he should "better stick to his lathe, which is to manage the health service a great deal more successfully."
The Labour peer added: "If there's any danger to the NHS, it is in staying in.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel