At the Parliamentary event I hosted, Ruth March from AstraZeneca explained how precision medicine meant we could eradicate all deaths from cancer in her lifetime.
We can avoid getting into an argument about whether or not the Government’s plan is an industrial strategy. The Conservative Party has got rather hung up on that term.
A lower tax burden will be impossible without less supply of government. And for there to be less supply, there must first be less demand.
When I was responsible for the £600 million a year London Development Agency, I was shocked at how much management focus was just on getting money out of the door.
£50 million of funding was announced this week for 13 councils to research “health inequalities”. The practical benefit has not been made clear.
These may take time to bear fruit, but must reassure the markets now that the growth path in expenditure will be measurably lower. Such measures must involve doing less, as well as doing things differently.
We hope over the coming years that our alternative nicotine products will continue to help many more adult smokers to make the switch.
The policy had real and sometimes tragic costs, but it isn’t obvious they could have been as easily avoided as some make out.
Pay for medical staff is set centrally and restrained whilst boards give administrators generous awards.
It has real democratic authority including with the Lords which might not be so inhibited from voting down new measures which didn’t feature in that manifesto.
The contrast between those blithe campaigns and this appalling landscape is unnerving, and raises profound questions about politicians and truth.
If we don’t avoid the bear traps, we will face another attack from a new ‘son of UKIP’ force that could unwittingly hand power to a Labour-led coalition.