4 years later...

It's interesting that this article warns of worsening financial problems for the NHS and hospital failures over the "next few years," however, it's been 4 years since this article was written and the NHS (and presumably hospitals) appears to be functioning quite well. It seems to reflect the thinking of the early 2000s when there was a lot of optimism about the private sector and a pervasive belief that private competition was a cure-all for a wide range of problems. I think attitudes have changed a lot since the financial meltdown. (For example, the idea of privatizing social security was quite popular at one point, but when people saw what happened to their 401ks last year, they're pretty happy government run social security is still around).

How are the hospitals doing now? The NHS does face its fair share of problems but it is still out-performing the US health care system overall. How would the NHS be different today if substantial market reforms had been implemented? Although financing and budget concerns are by no means trivial, it is necessary to separate the facts from doomsday predictions. All healthcare systems are facing rising costs, not just those with an NHS. So even if administrative costs and other waste is trimmed, the reality is that health care costs will continue to grow. The best that can be done is to slow that growth. However, it would be wise to examine the hospitals that are consuming greater resources and are at risk of failing since it seems to be implied in the article that some hospitals are performing better than others.