It is not often I have a warm feeling of goodwill towards the European Court of Justice.

So often, the decisions of that august body do not appear to have much connection with reality - more to do with interfering in matters which should not concern them.

But I did manage one small cheer for their recent decision which has forced the British Government to realise that "undue delay in medical treatment in their own country" means that patients can seek treatment elsewhere in the EU to be paid for by the NHS.

One cheer, not a victory dance, because of a feeling that this will be one EU ruling which may well turn out to have gone walkabout in the very near future.

But let us realise at a very early stage in this amazing U-turn by Health Secretary Alan Milburn that it does not seem to have been thoroughly thought through.

The very nature of the sort of operations we are talking about, hips, knees, cataracts and the like, means we are talking in many cases about elderly patients who would find the whole business of dealing with medical aid in a foreign country just too daunting.

Of course, there will be some who can deal very efficiently with all the red tape but for many it would be worse than staying here and fighting the NHS.

For the elderly, the support of their family is often crucial when undergoing major surgery and it would often be difficult to transport even one member of the family to France, Spain or Germany, even if carers could spare the time to be away from home for that long.

True, patient support groups have offered initial interest, as have some doctors.

But it will need legislation which has not yet reached draft stage and the airy-fairy way the idea has been floated, at a time when some real horror stories are coming out of the NHS, is more than just fortuitous timing.

It seems designed more to take attention away from the current situation than to offer a genuine chance for sufferers in the immediate future.

There could be a considerable drain on the health care budget. It would be better if the money was kept in the UK, even in the private sector, rather than going into the pockets of other EU medical services.

The Chancellor removed the tax advantages of paying for private health care in the UK. Many older people who had scrimped and saved to pay for such care, should they need it as they got older, found that they could no longer afford it.

Instead of sending vulnerable people to seek help in Europe, the Government could restore that tax advantage and allow the spare capacity in our private hospitals to be used effectively.

Those who pay for private insurance still pay their taxes which go to support the NHS, so the Government loses little by helping them with a tax rebate.

It would not be a complete answer to health service problems but it would go a long way towards easing them.

It would also do away with the idea that, as with some expensive drugs, what kind of a service you receive depends on where you live - the postcode lottery.

The bold and forceful will fight to get the best services but we should not forget the old and frail who do not deserve to be treated as second-class citizens.

They should get the best this country has to offer. They have paid into a health scheme for years under the illusion it would support them when they needed it. They should not be let down.

Let's hope it will soon be three cheers to the European Court of Justice and maybe even a small one for the Health Secretary.