It's a dog-whistle to the right.
If you don't follow politics closely and you're something of a centrist then you might not see why this is a problem, and I don't want to be accused of being condescending by attempting to explain the differences between Tory, Liberal and Labour ideology from a historical perspective.
Have a look on Twitter to the reaction from doctors and GPs to this article. The fact that Streeting has tried to defend himself with some highly convoluted semantic arguments should be enough to convince you that there's a problem. Trying to fix the NHS by declaring war on doctors comes straight from the Tory playbook. It is self-defeating for Labour and is a direct challenge, again, to the left.
Nationalising GP surgeries has been a Tory ploy to destroy the unique structure of the NHS for years. It's about removing control from specialists and forcing quotas (and worse) which will lead to a deterioration in health-care for the most vulnerable.
The NHS requires a massive increase in funding. This requires an honest look at how funding works. This requires an adult converation about what taxation is and what it is used for.
Labour should be leading on this but they've decided it's easier to just try and appeal to a slightly more right-wing demographic than explain why things don't work the way we're continually told they do by right-wing mass media owners.
As an aside, I'll give you an echo from the past - possibly mid to late 80s.
Education is a mess because the teachers are running it for themselves and not for the pupils.
What we need is more choice for parents.
To do that we need to streamline the exam process so that we can create league tables.
Is anyone going to argue that education is better now that it was back when we had O-levels?
It was very much a part of the Tory ideology that required (a) removing the soft social power of the teaching profession (lefties) and (b) the steady supply of bodies for the workplace with a limited capacity for critical thought.
They want a similar outcome with the NHS. Paint the doctors as the people preventing change for the better, when in fact they're the ones warning of the catastrophe that's unfolding. Slowly remove their power to prevent wholesale and irreparable damage. Then sell of the profitable parts of the NHS to the highest bidder and leave the public to fend for themselves (something that is already happening).
The fact a Labour Health Secretary has similar plans should be a massive red-flag for anyone that thinks Labour haven't been infiltrated by a bunch of economically right-wing Liberals (at best).
I follow it a lot more closely than most voters also a Labour member too. My circles or friends are largely centrists, centre left/ left and I work in an industry which is right, and previous industry was even further right. I'm also at a similar age of a traditional central voter, so I'd say I'm fairly well covered and what it will take to win, and who needs winning over.
Ideology (or being idealistic at least) doesn't work, Labour have never been close to winning when they've gone mostly or even fully towards what the party is supposedly grounded at. That's why the party is grounded there in name only, and it needs to stay that way if it actually wants to win. The only way you would ever get a Labour (100% as it's supposed to be on paper) in any sort of power, would be with PR. But, and it's a big but, that would largely mean Labour reforming to be a centrist party, or a centreist party coming to the fold. In either case Labour would have to be or buddy up with a centrist party (which would likely get larger and larger every year), so Labour losing more and more power to them (tories also). This is why no large party ever wants PR, especially when they have power, but long term it's probably better for all of those in the centre/ centre left or left as it takes away any sort of far-right influence.
The last time Labour won power back from the tories was 1997, under Blair (who I imagine you're not a fan of). He was the only one who grasped that you need to win first (and who was able to do it) before any changes can be made, and then once you're in power you can start to reverse Tory damage and start to do some good things. It takes a very long time though, and needs to be realistic. The country sits slightly right, and the press is further right, there is no "win" without some voters who are right of centre, and the votes in the centre are pretty much worth two of those who would never vote for the opposite party to blue/ red.
I get the doctors are miffed, but they more than anyone should realise changes can make things better, or less worse. Medicine is about sticking with what works, not making things worse and using advancements to make things better. But, it depends who is doing the changes, and what their intentions are. Changing from Tories to Labour would be a massive change to a positive, but you need to win first, and you can't win long-term by not having policies which will realistically control the centre.
It's not declaring war on Doctors, the Doctors are already in a war, they've been in a war for 13 years, and there are another 2 more years of that, then it's rebuilding for hopefully the next 10-15. The idea is to help doctors, in a realistic way, but by also being able to win, for a few terms. Yes, there may be ways to do that, which are further left, but realistically, doing that would be a much tighter vote, and likely a certain loss second term, then the doctors are back in a war again, likely for another 10-15 years, before anything was rebuilt.
The NHS structure is broken, separating the GP's out, but being nationalised and well controlled might help, and putting more funding into social care (which is causing an increase of bed blocking) would have a better bang for buck than throwing money at a broken NHS , without making changes. Like I say, it depends where the money is going to, everyone thinks we need more nurses, which we do, but the NHS is absolutely crying out for more management, who can handle resources better. The ratio of managers to middle managers and workers is completely screwed up, it's one of the most under-managed sectors.
I suppose an online triage (by an actual person) could direct 90% of what would have been in-person GP appointments to the right areas, which likely won't need face-to-face appointments. People need treatment, not an appointment, and not 1000 people calling up at 8am for 50 available slots, and no alternative doesn't work. Pharmacies are skilled enough to help with this direction, they just need to power (and protection) to be able to do it.
The NHS does need more funding, of course it does, but the funding needs to go in the correct areas. But the books also need to balance, and at a time when pretty much every sector is screwed. We're currently in a recession which is going to last a long time, or at least no return to real growth for a while. It's unrealistic to think that a pandemic, post-pandemic, war, energy war, super inflation, 15 years of Tory damage will not cause everyone problems, everyone is going to have to accept that some of these problems are going to take a long long time to fix, and how we have to fix them (and retain power to do it), might not be how they want.
I wouldn't bother giving the Tories ideas, it's pointless, especially at this stage, it's too early. But wait to see how the manifesto's are different.
Education is a mess as it also lacks funding, and the funding spent in the correct areas. i.e examples like spending money propping up private schools when they should be prioritising the schools at the bottom of the league tables, or spending money on where their problems come from. One major issue with this though, is some schools in bad areas are always going to have a massive problem, as the schools get wrecked by unruly children and nightmare parents, it's their parents who need educating, that's how the kids start on the wrong road and become a nightmare for the teachers, which then drags down the other kids. There's no incentive for the good/ progressing teachers to stay at these schools, so why would they? They get out as fast as they can, so they don't have to deal with nightmare kids (of nightmare parents), and work in rough areas. Nearly every teacher I know, was at a poor school/ in a rough area as an NQT, and now, 20 years later they're all in much better schools, in much better areas. They all moved over when were lower on the ladder, and most have progressed up the ladder at the better schools. One actually went back to their first school which employed them, 15 years later, and was back out of there a year later, couldn't handle the unruly kids and they had zero power to make any changes.
I'm not sure if education from schools is better than it was, but I think knowledge of children at 16 is better, but that's mainly through tech advancement, and easy access to online resources, but there needs to be a drive to use it or take more advantage of this. Unruly parents are never going to make use of this, they use school like daycare, and let the kids play computer games the rest of the time, or send the kids out on the street, uncontrolled, to be influenced by others who might be even worse. I did GCSE's, at a poor secondary school and the teaching was fine, the biggest problem the school had was the attitude of half of the kids, but again that comes from parents, not teachers, not blaming the kids, they know no different.
I feel sorry for the new teachers they seem to be used and abused until they get enough experience where they then start to have a choice of where to go, and that place being somewhere they would want to be.
Everyone knows the NHS is in a catastrophe, there are many reasons, 15 years of the Tories (by the time of the next GE), pandemic, post-pandemic, crap economy (which practically guarantees worse funding), inflation etc. There's no going back to the state it was in 2010 (not within decade), when it was running pretty well it seems. You can't go from worst ever to best ever immediately, it's not going to happen. It's a long-term project which will need to see some changes that some won't see as ideal. The changes will be far better than continual decline of Tory rule though, I'll guarantee that.
Like I keep saying, labour need to win, and win big (less chance of a loss second term), and then look at retaining power for 2-3 terms, that will ultimately give the best outcomes for the NHS, Teachers, Social care etc. Losing with perfect intentions is completely pointless and counterproductive, as in the real world this ultimately means handing the asylum keys back to the lunatics. The public are currently weighted to vote for these lunatics unfortunately, and the press control these lunatics' minds, it's far from ideal, so don't expect anything to be ideal, it never will be.