Skip to main content
Stories Constituencies Map About YouTube Substack Bluesky Twitter/X Podcast RSS
Episode 152

Penny

Harlow  |  NHS / Healthcare  |  10 May 2026
Across East of England, people are running into the wall Penny is about to describe. Penny is fictional. The wall is not. This is their story. In Harlow, healthcare training programmes sit capped while hospital wards rely on expensive agency staff to fill nursing vacancies that local people want to train for. Penny watched simulation labs gather dust while being told there was no money to train the nurses her community desperately needed.

I grew up in Harlow New Town, watching my dad manage production lines at the pharmaceutical plant while my mum helped kids with their reading at the local primary. After my A-levels, I drifted into retail for a few years, but I knew I wanted something more meaningful. The moment that changed everything was watching my nan in her final months. The nurses at Princess Alexandra Hospital were extraordinary - patient, skilled, completely dedicated. I remember thinking: this is what I want to do. I want to be the person who makes someone feel safe when they're frightened.

I completed an access course at Harlow College and applied to study nursing at the University of Hertfordshire. The admissions staff were thrilled when I got accepted. They told me they desperately needed more local students, people who understood the community and would likely stay after qualifying. I spent the summer of 2019 reading everything I could about anatomy and pharmacology, buying my first stethoscope, imagining myself on the wards where my nan had been cared for so beautifully.

Three weeks before the course was due to start, my phone rang. It was the university admissions office, and the woman's voice was apologetic but firm. My place had been withdrawn due to funding constraints from Health Education England. She explained that Treasury spending limits had forced them to cap their cohort sizes below the number of qualified applicants they had. I asked if there had been a mistake - surely if they needed nurses and had people ready to train, the money would follow? She sighed and said she'd heard that question dozens of times that week.

I wasn't ready to give up. I called Health Education England East of England directly and eventually reached an administrator who seemed genuinely frustrated on my behalf. She explained that Princess Alexandra Hospital in Harlow had dozens of nursing vacancies they couldn't fill, but Health Education England simply did not have the budget allocation to fund more training places. "There is no funding," she said, and it sounded so reasonable, so final. Everyone accepts that sometimes there just isn't enough money to go around. I accepted it too.

I took a healthcare assistant job at Princess Alexandra Hospital while reapplying for 2020 entry. When the pandemic hit, I watched agency nurses arrive on our wards earning double my wage to fill exactly the vacancies I'd been told there was no money to train me for. These weren't specialist positions requiring years of experience - they were the same basic nursing roles I could have been doing if my training place hadn't been withdrawn. The hospital was paying premium rates to temporary staff while telling local people like me that training us was unaffordable.

One afternoon in late 2020, I went to the university campus to submit paperwork for another application. The nursing department felt like a ghost town. Curious, I asked a student I met outside where everyone was. She told me that half the simulation labs were sitting empty because cohort sizes had been capped so severely. I asked if I could see, and she led me through corridors lined with locked doors. Through the glass, I could see brand-new equipment still in packaging - high-tech patient simulators, IV training arms, monitoring equipment that would have given students hands-on experience with the same technology I was using on the wards as a healthcare assistant.

That was the moment something shifted in my thinking. I was looking at a fully equipped training facility, designed to teach exactly the skills our hospital desperately needed. There were qualified applicants on waiting lists - I'd met some of them at my access course. There were experienced lecturers ready to teach us. There were clinical placements available because the wards were so short-staffed. If the people existed, and the building existed, and the equipment existed, and the need existed, what exactly was it that "there was no money" for?

I started to understand that when someone said "there is no funding," they weren't describing a law of physics. They were describing a choice. The government that prints the pound notes in my wallet had decided not to spend enough pounds to connect willing students with empty training places. It wasn't that the money had vanished or been spent on something else - it was that someone in Westminster had chosen not to create it in the first place.

The hospital was spending thousands every week on agency staff because it was politically acceptable to pay private companies premium rates for temporary nurses, but somehow unaffordable to train local people to fill those same roles permanently. The same Treasury that found money for bank bailouts and tax cuts couldn't find money to put students in empty classrooms. It was the same logic as a household saying "we can't afford it," except a household doesn't issue its own currency.

I'm still here, still working as a healthcare assistant, still watching this absurd dance between artificial scarcity and obvious abundance. I reapplied again for 2021, 2022, 2023. Each time, the same story: wonderful facilities, qualified applicants, desperate need for nurses, and mysterious budget constraints that prevent any of it connecting up. The excuse never changes, but I hear it differently now.

I used to accept that "there was no money" the way you accept that it's raining - as something that just happens, beyond anyone's control. Now I understand that every time someone told me that, they were applying household budget logic to a currency issuer. The government that prints the notes and mints the coins was telling me it couldn't find enough of them to train people who were standing right there, ready to work. The real question was never about money. It was about whether the people existed, whether the skills could be taught, whether the materials were available. They were. All of them.

The excuse was not a fact. It was a choice wrapped in the language of impossibility. The limit was never the money. The limit was the willingness to spend it into the places and the people who needed it. Every empty training place, every unfilled vacancy, every healthcare assistant like me who could be a qualified nurse by now - we're not the victims of economic necessity. We're the casualties of a political decision that treats public investment as a burden rather than as the means by which skilled people reach the work that needs doing.

I know this isn't just my story. It's the story of every constituency where people and needs exist side by side while someone in Westminster insists the cupboard is bare. The cupboard was never bare. It was locked.

4th decile
Deprivation decile (1 = most deprived) among 543 English constituencies
low
Documented funding gap severity
What just happened

Fake Experts

What Penny experienced has a name.

Using unqualified or misleading sources to manufacture doubt about what the data clearly shows.

What Penny experienced has a name: Fake Experts. When tobacco companies wanted to delay regulation, they funded scientists who would question the cancer link, creating the illusion that "experts disagree" when the evidence was overwhelming. The goal wasn't to win the scientific argument but to muddy the waters long enough to protect profits.

The same technique operates in economic policy. When Penny was told "there is no funding," the person saying it cited unnamed economists as though this made household budget logic scientific fact. "Economists say we cannot spend more on health without causing inflation." Which economists? The profession is divided. Many macroeconomists argue the binding constraint is real capacity, not currency. "Economists say" without naming them is an appeal to unnamed authority.

The fake experts treat the household budget analogy as self-evident economic wisdom, but repetition doesn't make it true. Households must find money before they spend it. Governments that issue their own currency spend money into existence. When Penny looked through those lab windows at unused equipment, she was seeing the real constraint: idle resources waiting to be activated. The UK government issues its own currency and does not need to find pounds before it spends them.

The resources existed. The people existed. The decision not to connect them was political, not financial.
Reality check
"Economists say we cannot spend more on health without causing inflation."
Which economists? The profession is divided. Many macroeconomists argue the binding constraint is real capacity, not currency. 'Economists say' without naming them is an appeal to unnamed authority.

Sources

Office for National Statistics
English Indices of Deprivation — gov.uk
NOMIS Labour Market Statistics
Official labour market data — nomisweb.co.uk
Charity Commission
Register of Charities — charitycommission.gov.uk
360Giving
GrantNav grants database — threesixtygiving.org
Disclosure Penny is a fictional character. Their situation is drawn entirely from official statistics. The institutions named in this episode are real. The people are not. Every character in the Blocked Britain series is fictional. Every situation they describe is statistically accurate. Data sources: ONS deprivation data, NOMIS labour market statistics, Charity Commission data, 360Giving grants data. Blocked Britain has no political affiliation and no named authors. It is funded by no organisation.
Next episode
Gary's Story
Crawley · Episode 153