Deeds not words

The facts clearly speak for themselves. A 3 per cent increase clearly accords, for example, with the government's overall fiscal policy. Also, there is no conclusive evidence available indicating that a more significant award is justified, and even if it were, it would doubtless be challenged by reason of its adverse effect on NHS pay differentials. The real point, however, is surely this: why should NHS paymasters be more open-handed when ophthalmic opticians have traditionally been prepared to provide their professional services in return for what they readily accept is inadequate remuneration? As the old saying goes, actions speak louder than words - and have we not been recently informed that we have a listening government? If, therefore, ophthalmic opticians sincerely believe that they are underpaid for their NHS work - and hopefully are able to prove it - the situation surely speaks for itself. In short, the only practical solution appears to be for them to emulate their dental colleagues and spurn NHS work until such time as the government is prepared to pay a reasonable rate for the job. We have also to recognise that the present system has within it a veritable timebomb, liable to explode at any time. As indicated, the profession has made much of its allegedly inadequate NHS remuneration and that the shortfall must perforce be derived from private work. This poses the reasonable question, why should individuals buying private optical services or appliances be called upon to compensate for losses sustained elsewhere? What better ammunition could there be for consumer activists ever alert to the possibility of the public being ripped off by suppliers? Given this scenario, the threat it poses to opticians' private charges requires little elaboration.