The Labour government’s clash with the British Medical Association (BMA) over junior (resident) doctors’ strikes is becoming one of the early defining features of its time in office. Health Secretary Wes Streeting has strongly criticised the BMA’s decision to proceed with further strikes, calling it “unprecedented” and “unreasonable” — particularly after the government awarded a 22.3% pay-rise for junior doctors, with a further 5.4% rise this year.
Streeting’s frustration is understandable. Patients are already enduring long waits, and staff shortages are biting hard. Any industrial action risks compounding that strain.
But Streeting’s choice to go to battle with the BMA, rather than build a broader coalition for change, misses the deeper structural challenge facing the NHS: a growing, self-perpetuating bureaucracy that is slowly suffocating the system from within.
A system overburdened by structure
Over the past decade, the NHS has been weighed down by the continuous layering of new organisations, reforms, and reporting requirements. Many of these were intended to break down silos, improve planning, or shift the system from crisis response to prevention.
But in reality, they have created a fragmented, overly complex system in which clarity of purpose and accountability are too often lost.
The most visible example of this is the rise of Integrated Care Boards (ICBs) and Integrated Care Partnerships (ICPs). These were introduced to coordinate services between hospitals, GPs, councils, and voluntary organisations — a welcome ambition. Labour’s 2024 manifesto endorsed these bodies as a means to reduce health inequalities and deliver more joined-up care.
Yet for all the good intentions, many ICBs and ICPs have become another tier of NHS management, consumed with strategies, committees, and stakeholder engagement; while frontline staff see little tangible improvement in their working conditions or patient care. Decision-making processes are opaque. Accountability is diffuse. And too often, the energy of integration has been lost in a fog of governance.
This is what NHS workers mean when they say they’re “done in.” Not just by the hours, or the rota gaps, but by the exhausting bureaucracy that too often inhibits care instead of enabling it.
Wes Streeting’s hard line with the BMA may be politically calculated, but it also risks alienating the very professionals Labour needs onside to rebuild the health service. Strikes don’t happen in a vacuum. They are a symptom of deep frustration with a system that too often works against the people trying to deliver care.
The junior doctors’ action is not just about pay — it’s about being respected, listened to, and given the space to do their jobs well. Many feel that endless system reforms and top-down reconfigurations have created more complexity but less empowerment.
Instead of doubling down on confrontation, the government could be using this moment to turn attention to where the real dysfunction lies: the bureaucratic sprawl that saps time, energy, and clarity from every level of the NHS.
ICBs and ICPs were meant to move the NHS toward prevention, collaboration, and local responsiveness. But today, few patients — and many staff — can explain what these bodies do, how they are held accountable, or how success is measured.
Rather than simplifying delivery, these structures often act as intermediaries between providers, regulators, and NHS England; multiplying meetings, planning cycles, and engagement exercises without visible impact. Many frontline clinicians report that the decisions affecting their work are made remotely, slowly, and without meaningful clinical input.
Unless addressed, this administrative sprawl will continue to pull the NHS further away from its founding purpose: care, free at the point of use, focused on need, and delivered with compassion.
Labour has made clear it does not want to return to the old-style centralised management of the NHS. But avoiding that model cannot mean tolerating a newer form of bureaucratic drift.
To make ICBs and ICPs effective, and to rescue the system from paper-heavy inertia, the government should consider a different approach, one that includes:
- Radical transparency: ICBs should publish simple, public-facing dashboards showing what decisions they’ve made, how money is spent, and what outcomes are being delivered.
- Local democratic accountability: Place power in the hands of communities by giving elected local government a formal role in overseeing ICB performance.
- Fewer layers, clearer roles: Streamline overlapping boards, clarify lines of responsibility, and reduce duplication between NHS England, ICBs, and Trusts.
- Frontline empowerment: Shift authority back to clinicians and care teams to lead local innovation, supported by flexible funding — not micromanagement.
- Patient-first design: Every reform should start with one question: does this improve care for patients? If not, it should not exist.
The NHS: fixing the tangled web
The NHS needs to be modernised, I think there is overwhelming consensus here — but modernisation should not mean more structures, more acronyms, or more middle management. It should mean a health service that trusts its staff, values its patients, and directs investment toward prevention, treatment, and care — not strategy documents.
Wes Streeting is right that the NHS cannot go on as it is. But the enemy is not the BMA, nor the doctors still showing up to work every day despite being overworked and under-supported. The real challenge is a system that has become tangled in its own process, and a politics that too often blames the workforce instead of fixing the machine.
If Labour wants to lead a new era for the NHS, it should start by cutting through the complexity and rebuilding a service that works — simply, visibly, and fairly — for patients and the people who care for them.
CLICK HERE TO DONATE TO OUR CROWDFUNDER
HELP US BECOME STRONGER SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO DELIVER POWERFUL CITIZEN JOURNALISM!
