The point is that all patients will be worse of if - regardless of how the NHS model might change - if there is a failure to invest.
The Kings Fund paper Iinked to above explicitly works through the options for changing the NHS models and concludes that whatever else is considered there needs to be more investment.
Satisfaction with the NHS peaked by the time Labour last left office. That was after a period of increased investment in infrastructure & equipment. We know from studies carried out by the Kings Fund (amongst others) that budgets for capital investment were re-directed to day to day spending from 2014 ish until 2019 under the Conservatives. In 2020 capital expenditure was redirected to Test and Trace.
We have fewer beds, medics and scanners etc than for example France. But then they spend more per capita on health than we do - and they've done it for a long time.
We know (again from studies) that poor productivity in the health sector is directly linked to poor equipment/facilities and yet this is often skated over.
Selling an idea that all would be well if only we moved to the same model as eg France woefully underestimates not only the initial task but the ongoing expenses.
And thats before we tackle social care.
Reeves has atleast protected capital expenditure - eventually that will pay off although I doubt that will be in time for the next election. There is the best part of a decade of investment missing. The next government could of course re-direct spending once again, leaving the service unable to make any headway and further ripening the argument to change model (again without ever mentioning the increased costs associated from that).
I dont doubt that many voters will look for a simple answer. And there will be politicians that will pretend that they have it.
I'm not even adverse to a change of model. I just hate the casual way people refer to it without acknowledging what it will mean for everyone (and most certainly tax payers).
That is of course if the new model is intended to succeed - otherwise we will have a half arsed version of an European model and nobody will be any better off.
Ultimately changing the NHS model doesnt belong in a party manifesto.
As a minimum it should require a cross party committee with a responsibility to engage with health economists. Options should be clarified and the costs need to be explicit.
Not a bloody fag packet packet analysis.