FULL marks for Charles Entwhistle's letter (You Say, Tuesday, May 13). At last, someone who knows the NHS from the inside has blown a few cobwebs away.

The finest achievement of that first post-war Labour government has always been flawed.

Michael Foot and Barbara Castle - to name but two - have described the compromise that great man Nye Bevan had to make in order to bring the NHS into being.

The question is, do we still need these compromises in 2003?

When I was employed, if I had told the boss that I was only going to work for him part-time and the remainder of my time was going to be spent working for other employers, I would, I'm sure, not have been in his employment very much longer - especially if he really needed me to work full-time for him.

So, why do we have to put up with this system in the NHS?

My wife and I have had to wait long periods - in my wife's case in considerable pain and lack of mobility - for essential operations.

Why should anybody desperate for treatment have to pay out their hard-earned cash in order to jump the queue?

In a modern social democratic society, surely the whole idea of private medicine is improper?

I've said many times before that the idea of private profit and public service is incompatible, and the case of health in Britain is surely a prime example.

But is New Labour bothered?

A J C EVANS,

Callow End,

Worcester.