The Impacts of The EU Referendum on The NHS

Tomorrow evening, on the 23rd June 2016, the future of the United Kingdom will be placed in the hands of the British Public as they decide whether to remain within the European Union or to leave. Too young to vote, and still undecided on the matter, I have no preference towards the leave or remain campaign. However, as a student wishing to study medicine in the future, the possible impacts of the vote on the NHS concern me. The referendum has highlighted the ugly side of politics, with both the leave and remain campaign manipulating statistics and playing on fear in a desperate attempt to convince the public towards their case. Therefore, I have attempted to sift through the propaganda and create a non biased analysis of the ramifications that both remaining in and leaving the EU could cause.

The EU's Role in The NHS

• Founded in Maastricht, Netherlands in November 1993, the European Union has both supported and influenced the NHS. According to the NHS European office "Whilst health policy and the organisation, financing and management of healthcare is a national responsibility of member countries, the EU also undertakes health-related activities, in particular, by supporting co-operation between member states in order to protect and promote public health and to enable the free movement of people around the EU"The referenced "health-related activities" include EU- wide public health works such as building awareness of HIV/Aids and cancer, anti-smoking campaigns and controlling public health threats such as communicable diseases.
• The single market rule allows health care staff to work anywhere within the EU due to the recognition of professional qualifications. In the UK,135,000 EU migrants work within the NHS and care sector, providing public services and contributing to the Government's  tax  base.
• The EU provides the public with the European Health Insurance Card (EHIC), entitling them to medical care in European Economic Areas including Iceland, Switzerland, Norway and Liechtenstein. However, the individual may be charged for medical expenses which occur.

If We Leave 

The vote leave campaign push the slogan claiming that "£20bn a year or £350m a week" is sent to Brussels by the UK, which could otherwise be spent on the NHS, improving public services. If the statistics are true, EU expenditure equates to the cost of a new hospital development each week.  In addition, former mayor of London, Boris Johnson, said that Brexit  would help put an end to long waiting hours in A&E by increasing available funding and reducing the pressures of an increasing population, partially caused by EU immigration. However, the chair of the Statistics Authority states that the figures produced by the leave campaign could be "potentially misleading". Furthermore, the Institute for Fiscal Studies calculated that the UK's net contribution for 2014 to the EU was actually only £5.7bn.
During the campaigning process, Priti Patel, the minister of employment said that "the EU is putting the NHS under threat" as 288,000 new immigrants per year cause "unsustainable pressure on our resources". In spite of her claim, I do not believe immigration will be the downfall of the NHS, but instead has been used to evoke fear amongst the public. In the UK,immigrants from the EU contribute £5bn to the economy each year, broadening the tax base and thus providing money for health care. If we were to vote out, a reduction in immigrants could reduce the money available for public services, leading to potential cuts in the NHS. In addition, the trade uncertainty could reduce the funding of public services.

If we Remain

Leading the remain campaign, David Cameron has warned that the out campaign is misleading and that leaving the EU could be very problematic for the health sector. The campaign states that directing money spent on EU contributions towards health would reduce aid to poor regions and payments to farmers.  By  remaining within the EU, we partially ensure £1.4 bn in research grants and guarantee health care for British citizens within other EU countries.
The out vote is ultimately a very daring leap into the dark, the economic uncertainty it creates irrefutably threatens the sustainability of the NHS, with 9 out of 10 economists saying brexit will damage the economy. Simon Stevens, the chief executive of the NHS certified that it "would be very dangerous if at precisely the moment the NHS is going to need extra funding... the economy goes into tailspin and that funding is not there". Therefore, although brexit has the potential to increase funds, it is an uncertainty and the remain vote creates more stability for the future of the NHS.

The impacts of TTIP

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is a proposed trade agreement between the European Union and the United States, set up in the hope that increased trade will result in economic growth. According to the Independent, one of the aims of TTIP is to "open up Europe's public health, education and water services to US companies." Ultimately, this has the potential to result in the privatisation of the NHS and as a result of Investor State Dispute Settlements (ISDS), third party companies could sue the UK Government if NHS contracts are lost. 
Conversely, Trade Minister, Lord Livingston, told a journalist that "The idea that this will lead to privatisation of the NHS is not true." In addition, the Government claims that TTIP could add £10bn to the economy due to the removal of import tariffs on American goods, providing money for NHS Investment.  However, even though the plan is strongly supported by Labour, UKIP,  the SNP  and Liberal Democrats, all of the parties have expressed caveats over the NHS.


The outcome of the referendum will greatly affect my generation and those to come, please use your vote wisely and base your decision on logical facts rather than the scaremongering tactics used by politicians.