SARWannabe - do you really think anyone has done a proper analysis of the medical need for this? Of course not. Senior ambulance officers have worked out that they can remove x front line vehicles and save y pounds. There has been no analysis or cost benefit ratios because the Sheffield study shows is is not economic.
As to are operations being undertaken - have you heard of waiting lists - you restrict the capacity and the patients back up. The social services budget ('benefits') are no more relevant than expenditure on MOD. The fact is that that £5 million could be diverted via charities to other NHS work (which is what HEMS is!!!) to greater effect. For example a charity recently spent less than £4m to install a Cyberknife at a major London Teaching Hospital. It will treat up to 400 patients with cancer a year and 'save' perhaps 200 lives. Now if cornwall AA Trust decided to stop funding HEMS and raise money for a Cyberknife ( the closest one to Cornwall is in London) would they be saving more lives or less lives? Doing more good or less good? If the local BBC news station or the times publicised these issues......
Yes there are serious shortfalls in the NHS and they wont disappear in today's economic climate by a bit of lobbying. It is fantastic that the NHS doesnt have to pay for HEMS as this would further strain funds. However, spending more and more on bigger and cleverer aircraft with no evidence of benefit and no consideration of the effect on other charities should be criticised as much as profligate waste. We need to ensure every penny raised by these charities is used to the maximum effect, complain when money is misdirected or wasted, and seek to save as many lives as possible with the finite amount the public are willing to contribute.