There have been recent calls for a royal commission (RC) on the British National Health Service (NHS). This article focuses on the impact of RCs and similar advisory bodies, particularly on finance recommendations, of three inquiries with broad remits across the whole of the NHS from very different periods: Guillebaud (1956); Royal Commission on the National Health Service (1979); and House of Lords Select Committee on the Long-term Sustainability of the NHS (2017). These inquiries appear to have had rather limited impacts, especially on NHS funding. First, there appears to be some hesitancy in suggesting precise figures for NHS expenditure. Second, the reports are advisory, and governments can ignore their conclusions. Third, governments have ignored their conclusions. In the 1950s and the 1980s, contrary to the recommendations of the inquiries, NHS expenditure subsequently grew only slowly, and charges were increased. In short, asking an independent RC to provide answers on NHS expenditure is perhaps the unaccountable in pursuit of the unanswerable.

中文翻译：

---

NHS 皇家委员会的失落世界：追求不负责任的不负责任？

最近有人呼吁为英国国民健康服务 (NHS) 设立皇家委员会 (RC)。本文重点关注 RCs 和类似咨询机构的影响，特别是对财务建议的影响，在整个 NHS 不同时期的三个调查范围广泛：Guillebaud (1956)；国家卫生服务皇家委员会（1979 年）；和上议院 NHS 长期可持续性特别委员会（2017 年）。这些调查似乎产生了相当有限的影响，尤其是对 NHS 资金的影响。首先，在建议 NHS 支出的精确数字方面似乎有些犹豫。其次，这些报告是咨询性的，政府可以无视他们的结论。第三，政府忽视了他们的结论。在 1950 年代和 1980 年代，与调查的建议相反，NHS 支出随后仅缓慢增长，并且收费增加。简而言之，要求独立的 RC 提供有关 NHS 支出的答案可能是追求无法回答的不负责任。