This is utterly idiotic. All they have to do is give people rapid access to consultants, then give them access to the drugs and treatments.

What we are doing now is first rationing access to consultants, then rationing access to treatments, then imposing delays and waits for treatment.

Then we spend the money that could have gone on both consultants and treatments on sending our surplus managers abroad to find out why people are better treated there.

This will never be solved until patients have the right to defined funding for treatments for defined conditions, from the provider of their choice. Including from competitors to the NHS. Maybe then we can get rid of the surplus managers and insane IT schemes and 100% bed occupancy targets and all the rest of the madness that gets in the way of treatment.

Frederick DesLauriers, London, England

Yet another half-hearted attempt at propping up the dismal 'health service' in the UK. Pick and choose from United States' practice as much as you like but, as long as what you propose is caveated by "within budget" then it will turn out to be another 'tweak', another amateur-night attempt to replicate without radical change.

The Unites States' cancer care system works because health care is delivered by healthcare professionals - and not by a bloated, antiquated bureaucracy. The healthcare system in the United States - no matter the current cries of peril - is more adequately funded and less burdened by 'management' than is the NHS.

If you wish to change 'outcomes' in the NHS, change the system.

John Blackley, Austin, TX, USA

So, Senior DoH officials are so dim they need to be taken on a tour of America to witness for themselves what's available. Why cannot they read the available literature, take a course in Oncology for Dummies and listen carefully to their experts? If they are too thick to do this, they are too thick to do their jobs and should be pensioned off and replacements with the proper background in the appropriate sciences appointed.

I hope this bunfest is being funded by other than the pulic purse.

Bill Q, Derby,

around where i am a gp the cancer services are brilliant. However it all depends on the GP; The GP is a screener and should the GP's over refer perhaps because they are not confident of the clinical abilities too amny people are being seen unneceassarily by specialist generating uncesssary worry in patients who do not need to be referred. The introduction of " referral management procedures" should be wlecomed to curp the unnessary and inappropriate referral of patients

chris, dunstable, uk

Despite the money pumped into the NHS it still does not seem able to deliver the goods.If we can only achieve levels of success comparable with impoverished former communist countries our system is flawed. We should move towrds the insurance based systems prevalent in the Eu which allows the individual more real power over his/her right to treatment and loosen the dead grip of the state in controlling our access to lifesaving treatments and concealed rationing. It is tragic that only those wealthy enough to traverl to the US or elswhere can bypass this control.

kay, leeds,

My husband has recently completed 30 sessions of radiotherapy at the Hammersmith Hospital. During our visits there, we noticed that although there were two machines for administering radiotherapy, at no time were they both used. On several occasions, my husband's appointment was bought forward ' because we aren't busy'.
This does not seem to equate to the comments that patients are having to wait for radiotherapy. Could it be that while the equipment is available the administrative services are not up to arranging for its use?

Nina Battleday, London,