PULL THE OTHER ONE.
For sometime now, the British Government have been grappling with the electorate's concern regarding what is known here as 'health tourism', which is self explanatory. What is not clear, is how much this costs taxpayer GB? This was one of the questions on the last programme prior to the summer break, the ongoing pantomime, 'Question Time'.
The situation is that the Government is suggesting a £200 levy on incomers, immigrants, students etc., as a form of health insurance. The Health Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, has settled on this figure on the assumption that the current practise could be costing taxpayer GB around £20million annually; others are talking of sums up to £200million. Enter Prof. J Meirion Thomas, a consultant surgeon of some 43 years experience, 31 of these in that senior position. The Professor says that we should be considering billions. His finest example being the situation in London hospitals, where much more is spent on HIV treatment for new arrivals than the amount expended for general cancer treatment for the patients who have paid into the system all of their working lives.
Back to the question: As viewers would understand, the panel is made up of people with a political bias. The responses were extraordinary, fudging to the maximum, finding a cross party consensus at something around £12million, casting this sum off as inconsequential; not unlike the comments from the British Medical Council. This figure, as we have already pointed out, is a fraction of the total amount; nevertheless, even at £12million, this is a disgrace and a con.
IT IS OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY.
The situation is that the Government is suggesting a £200 levy on incomers, immigrants, students etc., as a form of health insurance. The Health Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, has settled on this figure on the assumption that the current practise could be costing taxpayer GB around £20million annually; others are talking of sums up to £200million. Enter Prof. J Meirion Thomas, a consultant surgeon of some 43 years experience, 31 of these in that senior position. The Professor says that we should be considering billions. His finest example being the situation in London hospitals, where much more is spent on HIV treatment for new arrivals than the amount expended for general cancer treatment for the patients who have paid into the system all of their working lives.
Back to the question: As viewers would understand, the panel is made up of people with a political bias. The responses were extraordinary, fudging to the maximum, finding a cross party consensus at something around £12million, casting this sum off as inconsequential; not unlike the comments from the British Medical Council. This figure, as we have already pointed out, is a fraction of the total amount; nevertheless, even at £12million, this is a disgrace and a con.
IT IS OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home