Speaking of Andrew Lansley, Hopi Sen is having a bit of a go at him on his blog. Hot on the heels of Wednesday's press release calling for less health spending in poor areas, the Tory health spokesman is now accusing Labour of, erm... not spending enough money on health in poor areas. Or at least, not doing enough to tackle lower rates of life expectancy in poor areas.
Lansley says, "if spending on healthcare alone determined health outcomes, Glasgow would be the healthiest place in Britain and Wokingham the least healthy". But the spending follows the poor health... Is he suggesting that the gap between life expectancies in Glasgow and Wokingham wouldn't increase if spending in both areas was exactly the same per head? He makes a valid point that there should be more spending on public health preventative measures in places like Glasgow, but that shouldn't be at the expense of axing current funding for treatment when people do fall ill.