Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.


Your browser is not accepting cookies. This means means you will have to log in each time you visit the site.
For the best experience of, please enable cookies.

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

White paper let down by speedy schedule

The public health white paper is something of a an anticlimax. Government plans for improving the country’s wellbeing may well prove to be significant, but we will have to wait until well into 2011 to find out.

Public health struggles to get airtime – away from shallow debates over school dinners – and this was not the definitive statement of a new beginning that many were hoping would give the subject a higher profile.

The white paper is twice the length of Liberating the NHS, but carries even less detail and little that has not already been trailed. It is a victim of the government’s over-stuffed and overly ambitious timetable, which has resulted in a welter of documents with an unsettling imbalance between questions and answers. Consultation is a fine principle, but the current process is – unintentionally – sowing confusion.

The greatest unanswered question appears to be how the ringfenced public health funds will be divided between the new public health service and local authorities. Local government believes it will control around 50 per cent of the ringfenced £4bn public health budget. Audit Commission research suggests the functions to be inherited by Public Health England will command more than half of the funds. Expect a row.

All this said, the renewed commitment to an evidence based approach is welcome, as is the absence of any plans to launch a rebranded “Department of Public Health” – a Conservative pre-election pledge.

Readers' comments (1)

  • The real question (confusion) is who lets and holds the contracts for delivering health promotion services when these are often done alongside healh treatment services and sometimes inseparable from them. The flow diagram is one unholy mess.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Submission of any material is governed by our terms and conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.