I HAVE emailed John Glen (john.glen.mp@parliament.uk) on a number of occasions, in particular since June 2016 after my partner fell ill with Sepsis. Although he had a good recovery during his seven night stay in SDH he was moved, if I remember correctly, to five/six different wards/beds and that was in June 2016. The doctors and nurses were fantastic but rushed off their feet all the time not knowing where to put patients.

The point of my emails was to make our MP aware that the government is clearly underfunding our NHS and social care. John very kindly replied on all occasions by trying to reassure me that there is no real problem in SDH or the NHS with underfunding. For confidentiality reasons I cannot repeat his words but what I can say is that I am dismayed at all his responses so far and I’m being very polite!

I have read the letters posted in the Journal Postbag – many from those who really do know what’s going on at ground level. There clearly seems to be a huge chasm between John Glen’s view and those who work in the NHS and what’s left of our social care.

My suggestion to John is that our NHS and social care is taken out of the political arena. It is far too precious to be kicked around the political playground by sixth form politicians who rarely have any health care background. The learning on the job by the likes of Jeremy Hunt and Co is simply not good enough.

I believe that the way forward would be for the NHS to be directed by an independent body of people who have a health care background. Their remit would be to set a course for the NHS and social care perhaps 20 years ahead and to keep it in the public sector.

I know this would cost us all. It would inevitably mean we pay more in income tax or national insurance. However some funding could be found immediately, but cutting the £13billion we give every year without question through the department for international development (Dfid). I am immensely proud of the amount we give as a nation through charities like Oxfam to support various causes around the world. However, the money our government gives on our behalf through Dfid is questionable, particularly when we discover through documentaries on the television that millions of pounds end up in the wrong hands or dodgy consultancy companies and corrupt governments. Dfid is not foreign aid. Aid should be available but on a basis of careful analysis of need.

It might be a simplistic view but I believe that charity begins at home. To continue with the current system of cuts and underfunding is killing our NHS not to mention our most vulnerable on trolleys in corridors.

Jane Hurst, Salisbury