Criticism of the National Health Service (England)

[1] In making health care a largely "invisible cost" to the patient, healthcare seems to be effectively free to its consumers - there is no specific NHS tax or levy.

[4] British citizens have been known to travel to other European countries to take advantage of lower costs, and because of a fear of hospital-acquired super bugs and long waiting lists.

[8] There have been several fatal outbreaks of antibiotic resistant bacteria ("super bugs") in NHS hospitals, such as Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus and Clostridioides difficile infection.

[9] This has led to criticism of standards of hygiene across the NHS, with some patients buying private health insurance or travelling abroad to avoid the perceived threat of catching a "super bug" while in hospital.

[13] There has been considerable controversy about the public health funding of expensive drugs, notably Herceptin, due to its high cost and perceived limited overall survival.

Before the idea of private finance initiative (PFI) came to prominence, all new hospital building was by convention funded from the Treasury, as it was believed it was best able to raise money and able to control public sector expenditure.

[17] There has been significant criticism of this, with a study by a consultancy company which works for the Department of Health showing that for every £200 million spent on privately financed hospitals the NHS loses 1000 doctors and nurses.

[18] As well as this, it has been noted that the return for construction companies on PFI contracts could be as high as 58%, and that in funding hospitals from the private rather than public sector cost the NHS almost half a billion pounds more every year.

In response, it has been argued that the scandal brought the issue of organ and tissue donation into the public domain, and highlighted the benefits to medical research that result.

In April 2024, Health Secretary Victoria Atkins urged NHS England to prioritize evidence and safety in gender dysphoria treatment following concerns raised by the Cass Review.