BARRY Tempest states that he has made a number of points that are generally accepted about the NHS. I agree with him. They are not in dispute; neither was a single one of them mentioned in his original letter, which was instead based on a wholly inaccurate portrayal of the role of venture capitalists.

I think we all understand that an underfunded NHS will pay us back in all kinds of unpleasant ways. What some of us also understand is the economic impact of lavishing too much money on it, particularly when that money has been borrowed. In a statement that is strangely reminiscent of the old adage “those who can, do, those who can’t, teach” Mr Tempest goes on to say that it’s not his job to solve the problem, only to point it out.

But my problem is that he’s not pointing out the problem, he’s pointing out a symptom of the problem, and claiming it as a solution. There is nothing particularly insightful in pointing out that it would be nice if we spent more money on healthcare. I am sure everybody would agree. However, spending money can sometimes be as dangerous as not spending it, especially when it's not yours. This reality is being played out right now in Greece, where a decade of the kind of economic policy that Mr Tempest seems to espouse has resulted in economic carnage and a healthcare system that is - quite literally - on the verge of collapse. That this has happened is the fault of the Greek electorate: they voted for parties that promised them the earth, with no understanding of the consequences.

So what is the problem? Debt. A dangerous cocktail of both public and private debt which prevents economies returning to growth and governments legislating effectively. Governments will not act, though, unless they are told to do so by their electorates.

Can Mr Tempest now see the problem? The world needs to free itself of the shackle of debt, but he wants to add more to the pile.

James Young

Millspring,

Friar Waddon Road

Upwey