The best way to tackle health inequalities, Mr Cameron, is to tackle all inequality

The reason why the Tory health policy will fail is that you cannot attack major societal inequalities like health inequality without attacking inequality itself

For once, we can agree with the Adam Smith Institute: David Cameron’s new headline plans to “banish health inequalities to history” by introducing “a health premium that targets resources on the poorest areas” will fail.

The key reason why it will fail was already brought out implicitly on Left Foot Forward a couple of months ago – it is that you cannot attack major societal inequalities, such as health inequalities, without attacking inequality itself.

In other words, by far the most consequential way of reducing health inequalities, it turns out, is to target economic and other societally-central inequalities directly. Not to target absolute poverty or ‘deprivation’, not to pursue economic growth, but simply to reduce inequality (whether by reducing high earnings, or by increasing low earnings).

Here is how Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett put this point, in their celebrated recent book (pp. 233-4) ‘The Spirit Level: Why more equal societies almost always do better’ (a book given the plaudit by the New Statesman recently of being their “Book of the Decade”):

“For ten years Britain has had a Government committed to narrowing the health gap between rich and poor. In an independent review of policy in different countries, a Dutch expert said Britain was ahead of other countries in implementing policies to reduce health inequalities.

“However, health inequalities in Britain have shown little or no tendency to decline… Rather than reducing inequality itself, the initiatives aimed at tackling health or social problems are nearly always attempts to break the links between socio-economic disadvantage and the problems it produces.

“The unstated hope is that people – particularly the poor – can carry on in the same circumstances, but will somehow no longer succumb to mental illness, teenage pregnancy, educational failure, obesity, or drugs.”

This passage almost reads as if it were written in response to today’s Conservative initiative. If Cameron’s advisers had taken the trouble to read Wilkinson and Pickett, they would have saved themselves from the embarrassment of this new policy of theirs which is fated to fail.

To use a medical metaphor, the ‘health premium’ policy is a band-aid, which will do no good in curing a degenerative condition.

If Cameron were serious about reducing health inequalities, he would target economic inequality directly, as Wilkinson and Pickett recommend. But that would be very hard for the Conservative Party to stomach, seeing as the Conservatives are the party which, under Margaret Thatcher and John Major, pursued policies which hugely escalated inequality, when they were last in power.

In the Preface to their book, Wilkinson and Pickett note that they almost called the book ‘Evidence-based politics’, on analogy with the term ‘evidence-based medicine’.

The subtitle of Left Foot Forward is ‘evidence-based blogging’. The evidence is in – and it shows very clearly that you cannot cure the nation’s health ills, except by curing the nation of the disease of rampant economic inequality.

As you’re here, we have something to ask you. What we do here to deliver real news is more important than ever. But there’s a problem: we need readers like you to chip in to help us survive. We deliver progressive, independent media, that challenges the right’s hateful rhetoric. Together we can find the stories that get lost.

We’re not bankrolled by billionaire donors, but rely on readers chipping in whatever they can afford to protect our independence. What we do isn’t free, and we run on a shoestring. Can you help by chipping in as little as £1 a week to help us survive? Whatever you can donate, we’re so grateful - and we will ensure your money goes as far as possible to deliver hard-hitting news.

16 Responses to “The best way to tackle health inequalities, Mr Cameron, is to tackle all inequality”

  1. Lynda Edwards

    I also was totally unimpressed with David Cameron’s speech when I heard it yesterday. He spent his entire speech Labour slamming but didn’t clearly say how he and his cronies would achieve these aims.

    We all know what Tories will do if in power – rich will be richer and poor poorer. Will any jobs for normal workers still be in existence in a few years’ time? I am glad I will be at retirement age later this year – any party realistically being in power will not care about people losing their jobs. More power to the Greens!

  2. Politics Summary: Tuesday, January 5th | Left Foot Forward

    […] polls last year.” Left Foot Forward outlined yesterday how the announcement was confused on health inequalities and said little about […]

  3. Rupert Read

    Thanks Matthew. I broadly agree with your points; you may [or may not] be aware that I am a Green Councillor. Obviously, Blair and Mandelson in particular were bad for equality; though, to be fair, New Labour have not had nearly as dreadful a record on creating new inequality as the 1979-1997 Tories did.
    One hopes that there are some in Labour indeed who still think of themselves as socialists and thus will embrace the anti-inequality agenda. If so, then better late than never.

  4. Tory NHS Claims – Update « Mr Tom Harris's Blog

    […] way to painting the picture of the difference between the Green view on the NHS and the others. This article by Dr Rupert Read, of Norwich Green Party, underlines how poverty is such a huge factor in health. […]

Comments are closed.