See what a high band reads like.

P1The extent to which individuals bear responsibility for their own health, versus the state's obligation to provide universal healthcare, raises fundamental questions about solidarity, freedom, and the limits of government. Both positions reflect legitimate values, and my view is that a system of universal healthcare, supported by incentives for personal responsibility, best serves the public interest.

P2Those who emphasise individual responsibility argue that lifestyle choices, diet, exercise, alcohol consumption, and smoking, are the primary drivers of chronic illness, and that individuals who make poor choices should bear at least some of the financial consequences. This view holds that universal free healthcare creates moral hazard, removing the incentive to adopt healthier behaviours, and that it imposes an unfair burden on those who look after their health diligently. In market-oriented societies, personal accountability is also seen as an expression of individual autonomy and dignity.

P3The case for universal, publicly funded healthcare is, however, compelling on both ethical and practical grounds. Many of the factors that determine health, genetics, socioeconomic status, access to nutritious food, neighbourhood safety, lie largely outside individual control. A society that withholds healthcare from those who cannot afford it condemns the poor to worse outcomes through no fault of their own, which conflicts with basic principles of equity. Practically, untreated illness spreads, reduces workforce productivity, and ultimately costs more than preventive or early-stage care.