Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Helping the government save money

467 replies

Samdelila · 23/01/2026 18:49

I think free prescriptions for people with certain conditions should be means tested. What else could the government cut to save money?

OP posts:
LilyBunch25 · 24/01/2026 06:23

Samdelila · 23/01/2026 23:06

They shouldn’t be - that needs to be dealt with too.

Contradicting yourself here...........

LilyBunch25 · 24/01/2026 06:19

Samdelila · 23/01/2026 19:17

That’s what she says.

So what's your point...?! Person paying high taxes into system gets free prescriptions for life condition. I see absolutely no issue here whatsoever. This is a non-issue!

Coffeeandallthebooks · 24/01/2026 06:14

The government has just handed the Americans an extra £3 billion pounds for drugs in the NHS because we have capitulated to the USA in trade agreements.

You would need to save countless prescription charges to come close to saving the government the amount of money they've just wasted by doing that.

We personally pay 4k extra tax in Scotland and in return get free prescriptions, tuition fees, nationalised water. Average water charge is 545 a year. My friend in Cornwall pays 150 a month! Council tax is on average 500 less a year. All these things are worth more than an extra 4k, and 55% of Scottish people pay less tax, so only those with higher incomes pay more.

You don't need to means test prescriptions, you need a government that works properly so you dont have to.

Wolmando · 24/01/2026 05:52

Samdelila · 23/01/2026 23:31

No, it’s not. It’s a disgrace.

Scotland pay more tax though than in England, The amount of extra tax paid by an higher earner in Scotland is far more than the benefit of free prescriptions.

Aplstrudl · 24/01/2026 05:23

Make everyone in the uk pay for prescriptions, universities and care homes on an equal basis. No more free stuff being subsidised by the English.

HelenaWaiting · 24/01/2026 03:09

BlackCatDiscoClub · 23/01/2026 20:12

Stop the Department for Transport (I.e. the taxpayer) from funding the delay repay scheme when train companies should pay it. Thats not a criticism of the government BTW, its a criticism of train companies not taking responsibility.

Edited

Rail is going to be nationalised anyway so it won't make a difference.

flowersareforfools · 24/01/2026 02:51

Does the prime minister have to live in a prime central London location? Put him up in a two bedroom flat in Slough and rent out Number 10 Downing Street as an AirBnB. That should equally save, and make, some money for the Treasury.

LighthouseLED · 24/01/2026 01:53

caringcarer · 24/01/2026 01:51

I think patients should pay for their own food whilst in hospital. It is the National Health Service not National Canteen Service.

They’d need to vastly improve the food first

caringcarer · 24/01/2026 01:51

I think patients should pay for their own food whilst in hospital. It is the National Health Service not National Canteen Service.

Nearly50omg · 24/01/2026 01:43

Samdelila · 23/01/2026 19:20

If we can’t claw back unneeded freebies from someone on £200,000 then we’re never going to save money in this country.

How about all the health tourists who deliberately come into the uk and have millions of pounds of treatment and then bugger off without paying? Surely they should have their passports taken off them in the hospital and not given it back until they have paid their bill like the USA does?

rainingsnoring · 24/01/2026 01:40

Better to just scrap all free prescriptions. The annual prescription payment is currently a relatively small amount which most can afford. Perhaps there could be a reimbursement scheme for those on v low incomes.

winterbluess · 24/01/2026 01:08

I think there are plenty of places the government should go to save money before this!

LighthouseLED · 24/01/2026 00:56

Arlanymor · 24/01/2026 00:44

But how do you determine if their illnesses are age-related? That's my point.

You don’t. They just get free prescriptions?

jbm16 · 24/01/2026 00:54

Samdelila · 23/01/2026 19:09

I know someone who earns more than £200,000 who has diabetes type 2 and gets all her prescriptions for free, so people like her basically.

This isn't the Government saving, it's making someone who is already paying a large amount of tax pay for live saving drugs... The NHS is supposed to be free at the point of use, it's a slippery slope if we start means testing.

Studies estimate that the government waste £200 billion annually in inefficiency in our operations, having worked in the public sector it's clear there are easy savings to make, such as paying £1000 a day for consultants, quangos etc.

CheeseItOn · 24/01/2026 00:45

scrolls through and notices OP desperately fishing for someone to ask if she's on benefits

so she can reply yes, but that she needs them.

Which we should all then interpret as her wanting more money in the pot for deserving people like her.

And turn it into a fight about who deserves what and whether fundamental principles like free healthcare should exist, illegal immigration etc.

Boring. Not biting.

hahagogomomo · 24/01/2026 00:45

I’ll add it the unfairness that only drugs around when was written (late 60’s I think) are included and no mental health medication

Arlanymor · 24/01/2026 00:44

LighthouseLED · 24/01/2026 00:38

People over 60 currently get free prescriptions. I think this should be raised to align with state pension age.

But how do you determine if their illnesses are age-related? That's my point.

hahagogomomo · 24/01/2026 00:41

What I don’t agree with is a handful of conditions are cherry picked for free prescriptions and many others requiring daily medication have to pay. I think all long term prescriptions (prescribed indefinitely should be free actually, but we should pay for short term prescriptions like antibiotics

LighthouseLED · 24/01/2026 00:38

Arlanymor · 24/01/2026 00:36

What's an age-related prescription?

People over 60 currently get free prescriptions. I think this should be raised to align with state pension age.

Arlanymor · 24/01/2026 00:37

Samdelila · 23/01/2026 23:22

I think you should pay for your medication, yes.

I am not sure if you are dumb or just horrible. Why should I pay for it?

You don't know how it much it costs. You don't know how much I earn. But you have determined that I SHOULD pay for my medication? Just because I am not on benefits - but if I was on benefits I would be allowed to stay alive?

Hope your heart never fails, although I suspect you don't have one.

Arlanymor · 24/01/2026 00:36

LighthouseLED · 23/01/2026 23:38

But there are always anomalies. There are edge cases where people on benefits have more income than lower earners who don’t qualify. Benefits doesn’t automatically equal being worse off than someone not on benefits.

I think the age-related free prescriptions should be aligned with state pension age rather than keeping it at 60, though.

What's an age-related prescription?

Arlanymor · 24/01/2026 00:35

Samdelila · 23/01/2026 23:31

No, it’s not. It’s a disgrace.

It's a disgrace that different governments have different policies? All governments should be the same? Should we be like America then?

Burntt · 24/01/2026 00:07

I think we need to come away from this idea of where to save money. It’s hurting all of us except the really rich. We need to be think about where to be investing the money the state actually has. For that my list is:

They could put more money into education particularly for SEND children many of whom are out of education due to no appropriate provision. These kids will become adults without qualifications and without family support will need to rely on the state to fund them. While still school age if out of school many are in expensive packages for very low quality provision- spend that money on appropriate SEND schools and these kids get a future at no extra cost to the tax payer.

they could put more money into the NHS reduce wait times. Early treatment could save many people from becoming disabled by their conditions and/or get those unable to work due to ill health back working sooner with prompt treatment thus relying less on the state. better maternity services would mean less PTSD from the experience less high cost interventions. Better outcomes for mothers and babies.

bring utilities back under the state. Profits then get ploughed back to the state not into the already rich pockets. Or prices come down significantly.

address misogyny and save the next generation from it. All research shows better for everyone with low levels of misogyny.

require minimum attendance for MPs in the house of commons and in their constituency offices. So the people who actually go for that job really do care not just want good expenses package. Reduce the expenses by providing a reasonable accommodation for MPs when in London - same standard for nurses accommodation. I think half our problem is our country is mismanaged by idiots who are privately educated and only out for what they can get for themselves and their rich friends. Joe blogs working full time minimum wage jobs around caring responsibility isn’t in their radar

address the issue of career landlords and corporation landlords. Tax % on income from property increases the more you make so those renting out their home while they are away for work or moved in with a partner still make money but those with 4,5,6 etc properties don’t make enough to justify the effort. Rents may not reduce but more housing stock will be available helping more people invest in their retirement nest eggs and need less support from the state in old age and housing benefits.

better public transport. Enabling the lower earners to travel for work and earn more like those who can afford cars can.

better funding and quality childcare. Sooo much evidence that better early years childcare leads to better long term outcomes for these children and less reliance on the state once adults. Makes no sense to me how the funding and grants for early years has been whittled back to nothing since the days of Tony Blair and every child matters. It’s kicking a bigger can down the road and we are seeing that play out now.

make absent fathers pay for their kids. Single mother can then can either afford to get back into work and/or these kids have better outcomes through not growing up in poverty. Less reliance on the state (although it anti CMS being factored into benefits calculations to protect those who’s ex withholds money). Continue CMS past children adult age and direct it into the mothers pension to balance out the hit her pension took raising those kids for him. Less cost to the state for poverty in the future elderly.

build more prisons and put money into proper rehabilitation. Particularly address the low sentenceing for violence againt women and girls. Men who rape essentially get the first one free these days- it’s no deterrent and adds to the fear women have in society. More stringent safeguarding for children. Children with trauma are more likely to have substance abuse issues and mental health struggles. Abused children are statistically more likely to abuse their own children and perpetuate the cycle (I dislike this stat nd think it should be separated by sex to see if it’s actually universal trait or more likely in abused men). Reduce the levels of abuse and long term it will reduce the cost to the state. Dealing with the first instance of a person breaching safeguarding will mean less financial compensation for the children failed and better outcomes for these kids and less reliance on state support if there are less mental health disorders resulting from childhood trauma. Eg the pedophile taxi driver rings, children home abuse, pedophilic medical staff. Many times there are multiple complaints that are dismissed before proper investigation is carried out.

Oneforallandallforone · 23/01/2026 23:56

You sound bitter about the person you know. And too quick to say give it to those on benefits.
There are many on benefits who don't need them. People who fudge their income, people who work cash in hand, people who pretend to be single parents. people who have many kids so they keep getting benefits.
Of course there are people who need them too.
The same as with those get free prescriptions.

Politicians247UnderwearExtinguishingService · 23/01/2026 23:56

EilonwyWithRedGoldHair · 23/01/2026 23:45

Because then people who just miss out on being entitled to benefits might not be able to afford them, get worse, end up being hospitalised and that costs a shitload more than some free antibiotics and as an added bonus increases pressure on A&E.

(We don't get means tested benefits because of our savings, but our earnings don't cover our outgoings so savings are reducing. If I wasn't in Wales I'd absolutely be considering how necessary a prescription was.)

Yes, very much so. For proof of this, you only need to look at all of the people who live with severe tooth pain and other serious dental problems indefinitely, many of which get worse over time - because they simply cannot afford a dentist, whether an 'NHS' one (if available) or a private one.

Swipe left for the next trending thread