It might be shocking if there was an obvious reason to make it shocking. I don't think you had read the source material for the bit you quoted. There were suggestions as to why productivity might not be as bad as the simple stats - people are sicker after Covid, it doesn't entirely reflect the impact of an aging population, or the bed-blocking.Interesting yes. This stood out for me, "Relative to 2019, the government has put a lot more money into public services, increasing inputs. However, in some services – healthcare in particular – there has not been a commensurate increase in activity. Between 2019 and 2023, staffing levels in the NHS increased by almost 20%, but key measures of activity remained broadly flat."
So 20% more staff (and presumably cost) resulting in no more output. Shocking.
This stood out for me: "Measuring NHS productivity is far from easy. A simple count of how many patients are being treated in hospital does not account for changes in the quality of care, the amount of care each patient requires, or changes in the volume of care provided in non-hospital settings. But because more sophisticated estimates of healthcare productivity (such as those produced by the Office for National Statistics and the University of York) come out only with a lag of more than a year, any attempt at real-time monitoring must use simpler metrics. Even with those caveats, it looks to us that the NHS does have an ongoing productivity problem."