jen I think you have misunderstood my post - I am sorry if I didn't make my meaning clear.
When I said
'If Virgin didn't have those contracts, another corporate, probably American, would. That is the reality of the NHS today',
I meant that because American companies are already providing some NHS services, they would be bidding for the same contracts as Virgin and if Virgin weren't awarded them, they would probably go to the American companies. I am well aware of the role that foreign companies have not only within the NHS but other public services too.
As I have said, I don't like it either, but the reason the Government (and not only this Government, the previous Government did it too) is keen on it is that risk is transferred from the Government to the company. In other words, if something goes over budget, the Government, ie the taxpayer, doesn't lose out.
I'm afraid I still don't understand how exposing Ministers' links with Virgin or anyone else is going to 'save' the NHS.
I agree it is important to expose corruption and conflicts of interest in public life, but this is a side issue compared with the fundamental problems of the NHS, which are how to make good quality care available for all who need it within a limited budget, and how to improve staff morale so that they are capable of delivering it.