The Consumer Health Forum (CHF) has reportedly slammed the Federal Government’s proposed $6.50 co-payment on GP services, claiming that it would unfairly disadvantage vulnerable members of the community:
The introduction of a fee to see the doctor would hit the poor and chronically ill hardest and would be unlikely to generate savings, according to a report to be released on Tuesday by consumer advocates...
“CHF wants to ensure any changes are evidence-based and are not at the expense of those most in need of care,” said chief executive Adam Stankevicius…
Mr Stankevicius said a fee for GP services would be an ”ad-hoc and unproven step” that would not save money because some patients who avoided seeing the doctor would need more expensive hospital treatment when their condition deteriorated.
While ensuring that any changes are evidenced-based is obviously a sensible move, I do not understand CHF’s blanket opposition to a $6.50 GP co-payment.
The fact is, not everyone should be allowed to visit a bulk billed GP; rather “free” health care should be reserved for those on health care cards and low incomes.
Moreover, without some kind of out of pocket expense, GP services are likely to be overused, without due regard given to the overall cost to taxpayers and the Budget. Better price signals are, therefore, required in order to better ration services – as occurs with other government health services, such as existing payments to a pharmacist for prescriptions.
More broadly, the CHF’s position ignores Australia’s deteriorating budgetary position.
Medicare Benefits Scheme (MBS) outlays rose by 124% (from $8.1 billion to $18.6 billion) between 2002-03 and 2012-13, and are projected increase further as Australia’s population ages (see below charts).
In its 2010 Intergenerational Report, Treasury projected that Commonwealth health expenditure would balloon from 4% of GDP to 7% of GDP by 2050 without policy change, just as the taxation base shrinks due to an ageing population.
Put simply, health costs will either need to be paired-back or taxes will need to rise significantly.
A detailed evidenced-based investigation might ultimately find that the $6.50 GP co-payment will not raise enough revenue to cover its costs, in which case it should be abandoned. But this does not mean that it is bad in principle and should not be considered at all.
