There’s a separate thing I find interesting about the idea of asking employers to fund PHI instead. Surely the more business friendly approach is to say that the state covers healthcare costs so businesses don’t have to?Look at how France manage it. It's capped at a low level so it's not exclusionary but equally, stops overconsumption of services.
Continually bringing up the boogeyman of US style, purely privatised healthcare is genuine barrier to reform and risks the long term future of the NHS imo.
For example, I'm happy for prescription style exemptions/refunds be in place for pensioners, children, low/no income individuals.
There’s a separate thing I find interesting about the idea of asking employers to fund PHI instead. Surely the more business friendly approach is to say that the state covers healthcare costs so businesses don’t have to?
Is your thinking that people are spending more time in hospital than medically necessary?
I mean, of course they do in some cases.Is your thinking that people are spending more time in hospital than medically necessary?
That’s their choice in part made possible by offering inferior pension schemes, but you’re still effectively asking the state to cover health insurance costs through a third party. Why the need for a middle man?Employers already do offer PHI, my current role has PHI and my next role does. My view point is to incentivise PHI by scrapping VAT on it and to give tax breaks to businesses, self-employed and individuals who get PHI.
The idea is twofold; expand the private sector and get less people relying on long NHS waiting lists.
Which again makes it all the more stupid that benefits in kind and salary sacrifice schemes are going to taxed more from 2029.
Tonester where have you pulled this 200k figure from?About 28 million people attended A&E in the UK last year. Charging people £10 a visit in some moronic idea it will possibly stop 200K possibly attending A&E to improve everyone else’s experience is for the birds. Aside from the fact that 200K is not even trimming around the edges you’re not going to stop 200K because people will still come and pay it. Then there’s the wider issue that poverty and health are intrinsically linked. Here’s a statistic for the experts on here, 14 million. 14 million is the number of people living in the UK with health issues linked to poverty. Now try engaging your brain, not even your heart, just your brain. Is charging £10 a visit going to deter the 200k who don’t need to attend A&E or the potentially 14 million people living in poverty with health conditions and a far higher likelihood of needing A&E.
It boils down to what kind of country you want to live in. A compassionate country with free healthcare or a fucked up place like the US.
There’s a separate thing I find interesting about the idea of asking employers to fund PHI instead. Surely the more business friendly approach is to say that the state covers healthcare costs so businesses don’t have to?
Is your thinking that people are spending more time in hospital than medically necessary?
About 28 million people attended A&E in the UK last year. Charging people £10 a visit in some moronic idea it will possibly stop 200K possibly attending A&E to improve everyone else’s experience is for the birds. Aside from the fact that 200K is not even trimming around the edges you’re not going to stop 200K because people will still come and pay it. Then there’s the wider issue that poverty and health are intrinsically linked. Here’s a statistic for the experts on here, 14 million. 14 million is the number of people living in the UK with health issues linked to poverty. Now try engaging your brain, not even your heart, just your brain. Is charging £10 a visit going to deter the 200k who don’t need to attend A&E or the potentially 14 million people living in poverty with health conditions and a far higher likelihood of needing A&E.
It boils down to what kind of country you want to live in. A compassionate country with free healthcare or a fucked up place like the US.
Tonester where have you pulled this 200k figure from?
I think that's NHSE saying "don't blame us for the unending decline of the NHS since we got hold of it"It’s incredible when you look at it
NHS England » A&Es under siege from hiccups and ingrowing toenails
NHS England » A&Es under siege from hiccups and ingrowing toenailswww.england.nhs.uk
I think that's NHSE saying "don't blame us for the unending decline of the NHS since we got hold of it"
Yeah, I think the average list size is ~ 10kI was speaking to a bloke the other day who lives in Melton Mowbray.
He said there's only one GP surgery in the town, with something like 30k patients! It's the largest 1 practice town in the country apparently.
You currently get offered appointments for March!!
A simple charge of £10 per A&E visit should suffice
Sounds simple in practice, how would it work in reality. Firstly who is responsible for the administration of this charge and how much does doing that admin cost. What happens if people can't / won't pay, does an expensive debt recovery process start for the sake of £10? Presumably you can't just ignore non-payment or nobody will pay.It's like the whole £10 'no show' fee the Tories tried to introduce, if you just charged that for a GP appointment, who cares if someone turns up or not?
When I go to pick up my prescription there's an ad playing for 'be seen immediately, private GP appointments at £65 a go.I think that in time it's probably likely that primary care becomes a privatised service (it's already run by private practices) but I can genuinely foresee that it will be funded privately too.
I don't think it is the direction GPs necessarily want to go in TBF. NHSE has created a range of new posts described as medical associate professionals (MAPs) these are not qualified doctors or people with a medical degree. They provide funding specifically to employ these roles whilst not recruiting GPs.When I go to pick up my prescription there's an ad playing for 'be seen immediately, private GP appointments at £65 a go.
If I go on to the app my surgery uses for basic admin it pushes a similar service. Not hard to see the direction that GPs want to push things in.
It still doesn't solve the capacity issue of a full appointment book does it?It's pretty normal in social insurance based systems (e.g. France/Germany) to have symbolic charges in place. Like most things that are completely FOC, people take the piss.
It's like the whole £10 'no show' fee the Tories tried to introduce, if you just charged that for a GP appointment, who cares if someone turns up or not?
There is no major private sector capacity that is untapped waiting to be usedEmployers already do offer PHI, my current role has PHI and my next role does. My view point is to incentivise PHI by scrapping VAT on it and to give tax breaks to businesses, self-employed and individuals who get PHI.
The idea is twofold; expand the private sector and get less people relying on long NHS waiting lists.
Which again makes it all the more stupid that benefits in kind and salary sacrifice schemes are going to taxed more from 2029.
They have these at my surgery and give you no indication you are seeing on of those rather than a qualified GP. Unless you hit the point of them telling you 'I can't do that, you need to see a GP'.I don't think it is the direction GPs necessarily want to go in TBF. NHSE has created a range of new posts described as medical associate professionals (MAPs) these are not qualified doctors or people with a medical degree. They provide funding specifically to employ these roles whilst not recruiting GPs.
Perhaps the plan is for a poverty NHS primary care service provided by these people with GPs reserved only for those who pay.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?