Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 10244607

League for a ball game with a difference.

Abstract

The report in last week's Journal on the financial state of the Thames regions and Oxford RHA showed that many London AHAs are under severe pressure. This week Stephen Halpern looks at the rest of the English regions where cash problems are less critical. Growth money is helping to cushion much of the cash limit squeeze and most places look able to survive the year without too many cuts although at a few places severe cuts or deliberate overspending have occurred. The important thing is that the position could get worse this year. Cash shortfall estimates have been made on the assumption of an inflation rate of 17 1/2 per cent but it could end up much higher. Other problems faced by health authorities include increased fuel costs, implementing the Clegg report and the DHSS not playing ball by deciding that calculations of the cost of pay awards are too high. All these factors will combine to guarantee that life will not be too boring in the treasurer's department over the coming winter.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

S Halpern. 1979-10-19. League for a ball game with a difference.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10244607/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Health inequalities in Scotland and England: the contrasting journeys of ideas from research into policy.

Both the UK's Labour Government and Scotland's devolved Labour-Liberal Democrat coalition Executive have committed themselves to reducing health inequalities. Furthermore, both institutions have emphasised the importance of using evidence to inform policy responses. In light of such political commitments, a significant amount of work has been undertaken in the field of health inequalities in order to: (i) review the available research evidence; (ii) assess the extent to which policies have been based on this research evidence; and (iii) evaluate the success (or failure) of policies to tackle health inequalities. Yet so far only limited attention has been given to exploring how key actors involved in research-policy dialogues understand the processes involved. In an attempt to address this gap, this article draws on data from semi-structured interviews with 58 key actors in the field of health inequalities research and policymaking in the UK to argue that it is ideas, rather than research evidence, which have travelled from research into policy. The descriptions of the varying journeys of these ideas fit three types--successful, partial and fractured--each of which is outlined with reference to one example. The paper then employs existing theories about research-policy relations and the movement of ideas in an attempt to illuminate and better understand the contrasting journeys. In the concluding discussion, it is argued that the third approach, which focuses on the entrepreneurial processes involved in the marketing of ideas, is most helpful in understanding the research findings, but that this needs to be discussed in relation to the political context within which negotiations take place.

England↗