State subsidy on G.P.s’ fees likely to rise

Press, 13 February 1986, Page 8

State subsidy on G.P.s’ fees likely to rise

By

MARTIN FREETH

in Wellington

The State subsidy on general practitioners’ fees is likely to rise after a Government review of all health benefits announced yesterday. The review is intended to overhaul the principles for allocation of Government spending on health benefits. A three-member review panel will consult groups and write a report by the end of August. Announcing the review, the Minister of Health, Dr Bassett, hinted at substantial increases in some benefits and a possible rise in total Government spending on health. State support through a wide range of benefits was inadequate, Dr Bassett told a press conference.

He singled out some general medical service

benefits as lagging behind others after not being increased for some years. The 8 per cent benefit now paid on the cost of adult consultations with a general practitioner was “miles too low,” the Minister said.

However, across-the-board increases in benefits should not be assumed as an outcome of the review.

The review would determine priorities and principles for the channelling of increasing State support into the health system. “I have always been a very firm supporter of a much bigger State contribution in the provision of health benefits. It is absolutely essential that people are able to get on to the first rung of the health ladder, and there should not be a major cost impediment to being able to use the health ser-

vices,” Dr Bassett said. There were "so many cost impediments right across the board.” However, he acknowledged political impediments to any rise in health spending. “There is an organisation called Treasury which has naturally to keep an eye on the funds available, and I don’t doubt that whatever comes out of the report, and whatever the Government agrees to after wide discussion, there will always be that kind of argument about ‘can we afford an increase this year.’ “That is the nature of the provision of social services.”

Dr Bassett hoped the review would lead to a clear method of adjusting benefit levels which would “at least in part take care of those questions.”

The review panel will

be chaired by Dr Claudia Scott, a Victoria University economist. The other members are Mr Geoffrey Fougere, a sociologist at the Wellington Clinical School and formerly a lecturer at the University of Canterbury, and Dr John Marwick, a general practitioner and director of the Family Medicine Training Programme. The panel’s broad terms of reference include the relationship between health benefits and other areas of social policy and alternative levels and systems of funding.

Dr Bassett said the panel would look at Medicare in Australia, which provides benefits higher than those in New Zealand.

He said a review would also extend to Accident Compensation Corporation benefits. Reductions in this area could not be

ruled out, he said. Dr Bassett compared the 100 per cent benefit paid to a person incapacitated by accident with the 8 per cent benefit received by someone requiring comparable care because of illness as an example of the “higgledypiggledy” nature of State contributions to health care. He attributed the wide range of benefits to an erosion of the philosophy applied in 1938 when the system was introduced. “Some benefits have not been adjusted for many years, while others are 100 per cent benefits, and some have unique methods of regular adjustment.”

The review panel will consult professional bodies and receive submissions from groups and individuals by June 1. Its report would be made public, Dr Bassett said.