finances. i don t think you can separate the two. we made the important decision to say that the health service was different, its budget would be protected, so there were real terms increases every year. for instance, there were 10,000 more doctors working in the nhs at the end of the time i was prime minister than there were at the beginning. would everyone like to spend even more on the health service? yes. making these difficult choices about spending was not a sort of option that was picked out of thin air. i still believe it was absolutely essential to get the british economy and british public finances back to health so you can cope with future crises. the inquiry has received cope with future crises. the inquiry has received witness cope with future crises. the inquiry has received witness statements i cope with future crises. the inquiry i has received witness statements from jeremy has received witness statements from jeremy hunt, who was the secretary of state jeremy
two. keep watching on the news channel. i agree with professor vanbrugh that social and economic conditions have a big bearing on health inequalities, and therefore the fact that there were 2.6 million more people in work, there were over half a million fewer children in households where no one worked. these are, though obviously a big dent in pension poverty because of the triple lock and the increase in the triple lock and the increase in the pension, these are positives as well which they don t seem to get mentioned in the same way. sol well which they don t seem to get mentioned in the same way. so i had my problems with them, but i m sure the inquiry can look at the evidence and come to its conclusions. do you acce -t and come to its conclusions. do you accept that and come to its conclusions. do you accept that cuts and come to its conclusions. do you accept that cuts to and come to its conclusions. do you accept that cuts to public and come to its conclusions. do you acc
ust fenced, but of course, as we have just discussed, that was only relevant just discussed, that was only relevant up to 2012, at which point in tinre, relevant up to 2012, at which point in time, public health was no longer funded in time, public health was no longer funded through the department of health funded through the department of health. do you accept, mr cameron, that the health. do you accept, mr cameron, that the health budgets over the time of that the health budgets over the time of your government were inadequate, and led to a depletion inadequate, and led to a depletion in its inadequate, and led to a depletion in its ability to provide an adequate service? | in its ability to provide an adequate service?- in its ability to provide an adequate service? i don t accept that. neither adequate service? i don t accept that. neither on adequate service? i don t accept that. neither on a adequate service? i don t accept that. neither on a big adequate se
reports, there wasjust the same amount of money. in several reports, there was just this assumption that you only ever measure inputs rather than measuring outputs. for instance, i would say the creation of public health england, where a lot of it was merging together other bodies, increase the focus on public health, meant money was spent more wisely, and i would argue also that the health and social care act, by putting public health into local authorities, that was the right place for it. local authorities are responsible for housing, for education, and for licensing. so making them responsible for public health is logical. i think most of the experts coming to your inquiry, i don t think people would argue to turn the clock back and put it into the health service. i think these were good reforms. yes, we faced very difficult financial circumstances, but where we could we try to encourage the spending of money more wisely, and sometimes the merging of public bodies was a sensible th
health. changed the landscape of public health, did it not, because it transferred to local authorities public transferred to local authorities public health features, and the involvement of directors of public health involvement of directors of public health. so, from that time, from 2012. health. so, from that time, from 2012, those health. so, from that time, from 2012, those areas of public health were 2012, those areas of public health were no 2012, those areas of public health were no longer funded through the department of health in the way that they had department of health in the way that they had been before. mr osborne also says they had been before. mr osborne also says in they had been before. mr osborne also says in paragraph 71 of his witness also says in paragraph 71 of his witness statement, we don t need to put this witness statement, we don t need to put this up. witness statement, we don t need to put this up, that the department of health put