The trouble with targets...
... is that in any system or organisation where success is measured by abstract criteria like these "targets" the people in hte organisation get really good at manipulating the system to produce a "target result" and rather less good at whatever the organisation was set up to do -- in this case traeting sick people.
Some examples:-
the "Large Anonymous IT Company" has a problem tracking system in place for some years now whereby the support staff lose bonus if they don't resolve problems within 14 days. However all the support staff know that "resolve" includes asking the customer for more data. Its not unheard of for customers to receive pointless requests for single parameter settings at thirteen day intervals thereby ensureing that the support bod "has resolved all problems within 14 days" even though the call has been outstanding for 12 weeks and nothing constructive has been done. He probably gets a much better bonus than the poor suckers who waste there time trying to solve the customers problems.
Another more historical example would be the classic Soviet 5 year plans. The consequences of failing a target were rather drastic under Stalins leadership therfore all targets were met. Tractor production was always up althought some tractors did not have wheels, towns and villages were electrified on time (though the lightbulbs were rather dim from the 90 volts supplied).
I suppose its rally our own fault for electing lawyers, PR persons, advertising execs and phone cleaners to run the country.