The authors of an editorial in the BMJ say, “whatever our views as individuals, or how we voted in the 2016 referendum, we can no longer escape the fact that Brexit in any form so far discussed is bad for health”.
The article, written by public health doctors, Mike Gill and Martin McKee, along with Mark Malloch Brown of Best for Britain and BMJ’s Editor in Chief, Fiona Godlee, calls on UK health professionals to help mobilise public opinion for a “people’s vote” on the details of any deal negotiated by the government to protect public health.
They point to a report published last month by the think tank Global Future, which says that the Norway option, by which the UK would remain in the European Economic Area, would reduce public finances by a figure equivalent to 9 per cent of the NHS 2018 budget.
The Canada option, involving a future free trade agreement, would see funding cut by 31 per cent. In the event of no deal being struck, funding is expected to drop by 44 per cent. With the Government’s proposed deal, funding would reduce by 22 per cent.
“If we knew that an infectious agent posed a serious threat to the health of our population and we could prevent it, then we would have no hesitation in demanding and ensuring that something be done. Yet when we are faced with clear evidence that political decisions will cause harm, many of us feel we should be silent,” they say.
Ultimately, politicians decide, “but we have a responsibility to ensure that they do so on the best evidence available, regardless of where the threat comes from. With Brexit, the evidence is now very clear,” they conclude.