Acceptable

Let me state the questions again: Should the public health care system offer the best level of care to all patients ?

The answer should be NO. A responsible government should offer the minimally acceptable level of free medical care to its citizen - everything else should (at least partly) come from patients' own pocket.

(For example, in our present scenario, if we define care by a junior specialist is the acceptable level, then there is no need for the senior professor to see all patients again - even though the professor may offer a better care.)

The reason is not only a completely free-of-charge public health care would drive out the private sector, result in monopoly and inevitably inefficiency. The consideration is more fundamental: A righteous society should promote the health of its people and work to prevent premature death, but it should not (alas, may not want to) aim for endless extension of her citizens' lifespan.

PS. Don't be mistaken. I am saying a responsible government should aim to offer a minimal standard of health service to the community; each individual clinician should, however, offer the best level of care within his own capability. Many philosophers and honorable council members could not discern the difference between the two - so that they often bark up the wrong tree.