Motion OU Debate Club - Taxpayers should not bear the burden of financing non-essential treatments within the NHS - Opposition
Sunday 4 October 2026 at 11:11
Visible to anyone in the world
Edited by Frederique Lanoix, Sunday 4 October 2026 at 11:13
15th April 2024 - Motion OU Debate Club - Taxpayers should not bear the burden of financing non-essential treatments within the NHS
Opposition
The NHS has been treating the nation for 76 years and it aims to provide high-quality health care. However, the Tories have been working hard to destroy it and it is unsurprising to hear that there is yet another motion which aims to debate how to bring more austerity within the NHS. My argument will cover how Taxpayers should finance non-essential treatments because those treatments can make the difference on a preventive level.
Mister Chairman, Taxpayers must be aware of the dangers of not financing non-essential treatments because they count. Indeed. Mister Chairman, those treatments are non-invasive, require less health care planning, and are cheap and, most importantly, they are less risky compared to the necessary treatments.
This means that by providing non-essential treatments, the NHS acts as a protective filter dedicated to teaching patients about the risks and the benefits of those treatments. For example, in June 2018, the NHS news published an article stressing the importance of encouraging people not to engage with risky treatments, adding that and I quote, “Patients would be spared more than 100,000 unnecessary procedures a year, freeing up an estimated £200 million that can be spent on more effective treatments.” The article also explains that in some cases, and I quote, ‘alternative treatments like physiotherapy, a minor injection or change of diet are likely to be effective’.
So, a patient with cancer, for example, can go through cancer treatments and benefit from a non-essential treatment as part of a holistic health care plan. Indeed, health care takes place in every action taken by patients at every stage of their lives. Hence, taxpayers benefit from having access to non-essential treatments.
Cutting non-essential treatments will exacerbate the lack of funding already experienced by hard-working doctors, nurses, and other health professionals. They will have to deal with emergencies which are preventable. The NHS is already in crisis because it has been underfunded for the past 14 years which created a vast array of issues that led us to today’s debate. Mister Chair, according to the organisation Health Funding, the NHS has been underfunded for so long under this Tory government that the money allocated to face the Covid-19 pandemic has not changed the fact that the national health system is crumbling.
In a short report broadcast on Channel 4 News on 11th April 2024, the challenges faced by patients on the NHS waiting list are described. Patients are not receiving the health care that they desperately need which makes the difference between life and death in some cases. A simple procedure such as a scan or a full check-up can detect health issues early, increase lifespan and reduce the risks of having to live with long-lasting handicaps, for example. Those non-essential treatments count in the overall wellbeing of individuals and they are cost-effective in that the taxpayers do not have to pay more down the line.
What the taxpayers need to focus on now is how treatments are going to be improved rather than trying to force austerity onto them as a means to get the NHS fit into an obsolete ideology. This government has been unable to determine what non-essential treatments are anyway. So, it would be pointless to dig into an argument which has no reason for being other than to destroy the NHS further.
So, when Ms Atkins, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care suggested that the government is “spending record amounts on the NHS” on the BBC on the 10th April 2024, she seems unbelievably disconnected from what the public needs. The government must consider the non-essential treatments as part of providing excellent and bespoke health care. Besides, there have already been attempts to cut costs within the NHS. In 2018, The Guardian said that the health service had hoped to save £200m a year by reducing risky or unnecessary procedures. It simply means that investing in people’s health is to give a holistic approach to patients by including non-essential treatments.
In conclusion, this government has not been able to fund the NHS in a way that keeps patients’ health at the forefront while ensuring spending is efficient. For far too long, the taxpayers have been misled by this government, which uses austerity to defund the NHS. It is time to protect, improve, boost, appreciate and fund the NHS. Non-essential treatments have their benefits, and the patients need them.
Motion OU Debate Club - Taxpayers should not bear the burden of financing non-essential treatments within the NHS - Opposition
15th April 2024 - Motion OU Debate Club - Taxpayers should not bear the burden of financing non-essential treatments within the NHS
Opposition
The NHS has been treating the nation for 76 years and it aims to provide high-quality health care. However, the Tories have been working hard to destroy it and it is unsurprising to hear that there is yet another motion which aims to debate how to bring more austerity within the NHS. My argument will cover how Taxpayers should finance non-essential treatments because those treatments can make the difference on a preventive level.
Mister Chairman, Taxpayers must be aware of the dangers of not financing non-essential treatments because they count. Indeed. Mister Chairman, those treatments are non-invasive, require less health care planning, and are cheap and, most importantly, they are less risky compared to the necessary treatments.
This means that by providing non-essential treatments, the NHS acts as a protective filter dedicated to teaching patients about the risks and the benefits of those treatments. For example, in June 2018, the NHS news published an article stressing the importance of encouraging people not to engage with risky treatments, adding that and I quote, “Patients would be spared more than 100,000 unnecessary procedures a year, freeing up an estimated £200 million that can be spent on more effective treatments.” The article also explains that in some cases, and I quote, ‘alternative treatments like physiotherapy, a minor injection or change of diet are likely to be effective’.
So, a patient with cancer, for example, can go through cancer treatments and benefit from a non-essential treatment as part of a holistic health care plan. Indeed, health care takes place in every action taken by patients at every stage of their lives. Hence, taxpayers benefit from having access to non-essential treatments.
Cutting non-essential treatments will exacerbate the lack of funding already experienced by hard-working doctors, nurses, and other health professionals. They will have to deal with emergencies which are preventable. The NHS is already in crisis because it has been underfunded for the past 14 years which created a vast array of issues that led us to today’s debate. Mister Chair, according to the organisation Health Funding, the NHS has been underfunded for so long under this Tory government that the money allocated to face the Covid-19 pandemic has not changed the fact that the national health system is crumbling.
In a short report broadcast on Channel 4 News on 11th April 2024, the challenges faced by patients on the NHS waiting list are described. Patients are not receiving the health care that they desperately need which makes the difference between life and death in some cases. A simple procedure such as a scan or a full check-up can detect health issues early, increase lifespan and reduce the risks of having to live with long-lasting handicaps, for example. Those non-essential treatments count in the overall wellbeing of individuals and they are cost-effective in that the taxpayers do not have to pay more down the line.
What the taxpayers need to focus on now is how treatments are going to be improved rather than trying to force austerity onto them as a means to get the NHS fit into an obsolete ideology. This government has been unable to determine what non-essential treatments are anyway. So, it would be pointless to dig into an argument which has no reason for being other than to destroy the NHS further.
So, when Ms Atkins, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care suggested that the government is “spending record amounts on the NHS” on the BBC on the 10th April 2024, she seems unbelievably disconnected from what the public needs. The government must consider the non-essential treatments as part of providing excellent and bespoke health care. Besides, there have already been attempts to cut costs within the NHS. In 2018, The Guardian said that the health service had hoped to save £200m a year by reducing risky or unnecessary procedures. It simply means that investing in people’s health is to give a holistic approach to patients by including non-essential treatments.
In conclusion, this government has not been able to fund the NHS in a way that keeps patients’ health at the forefront while ensuring spending is efficient. For far too long, the taxpayers have been misled by this government, which uses austerity to defund the NHS. It is time to protect, improve, boost, appreciate and fund the NHS. Non-essential treatments have their benefits, and the patients need them.
Reference:
· NHS England » NHS England action to stop patients undergoing ineffective and risky treatments
· NHS England: life in 'no man's land' on the waiting list (youtube.com)
· NHS wields the axe on 17 'unnecessary procedures' | NHS | The Guardian
· Complementary and alternative medicine - NHS (www.nhs.uk)
· National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)
· Alexander technique for Parkinson's disease
· Health funding data analysis (bma.org.uk)
· How the Tory party has systematically run down the NHS | Letters | The Guardian
· Listen: Health secretary Victoria Atkins clashes with BBC’s Nick Robinson over NHS spending (msn.com)