Medical body AMA concerned about GP fee option

   
    AAP
    December 29, 2013
    The Australian.

A MOVE to impose additional fees on patients to visit their GP could limit access for the disadvantaged, the Australian Medical Association (AMA) believes.

News Corp Australia newspapers have reported that a Commission of Audit into government services has listed co-payments as an option for the federal government to consider.

Co-payments would see patients fork out a fee for bulk-billed visits to the GP.    

A research paper compiled by Prime Minister Tony Abbott's former health adviser suggests a co-payment could reduce GP visit numbers, the report says.

However, AMA president Dr Steve Hambleton says anything that limits people getting to the GP was a concern.

"The group we are very concerned about is Aboriginal people, pensioners and people with limited access," he told AAP.

"If extra costs are imposed, people would have to choose whether they go to the doctor at all."      



Dr Hambleton said the majority of visits to the GP were very "reasonable and helpful" with only a minority causing doctors to ask why they came.

He said a co-payment plan introduced under the Hawke government in the 1990s was significant enough to contribute to a change of prime minister.

"We do need to make sure people have access to primary care," he said.

Dr Hambleton said the focus needed to be on wellness, maintenance and preventative care.

Comment has been sought from the prime minister's office.

However, when asked whether he would consider swapping bulk-billing for a $5 co-payment for bulk-billed consultations, Mr Abbott told News Corp he was not going to flag what might be in the budget.

"Other than to say we need a massive fiscal repair job," he said.

Opposition health spokeswoman Catherine King called on Mr Abbott to immediately rule out any new fee.         

"Australians should not be provided with a disincentive to visit their doctor," she said in a statement.

"Families shouldn't have to pay the prime minister a new tax every time their child is sick." Ms King said she was concerned what additional pressure a new fee for seeing the GP would have on the public hospital system.

Acting Greens leader Senator Richard Di Natale said introducing new patient fees would cause many to think twice before seeing a doctor.      

He said it was a step towards a two-tiered US-style health system and away from universal healthcare.

"It looks like vulnerable and low-income Australians are the ones who are going to pay the price," he said.

adelcrow wrote on Dec 29^th, 2013 at 2:45pm:


He did say no surprises though, If he hadn't been doing things like this I think we all would have been surprised.

That was what he meant wasn't it ?

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 29^th, 2013 at 2:41pm:

First, I'll make a correction - the one third figure is in relation to what the Federal government gives the States for health care (INCLUDING infrastructure).

Quote:

Source: Little evidence health insurance rebate has achieved savings for consumers (SMH)

As usual, you do not provide evidence to back up your assertion. Your argument is rejected because you're just making it up.

Secondly, removing the subsidy and giving it to public hospitals will take care of any problem with people moving to the public system. Let the health insurance funds compete in the free market on their merits and not because they are propped up by excessively generous corporate welfare. Your "communist" waffle is laughable nonsense, how can an undistorted free market be communist?

Bam wrote on Dec 29^th, 2013 at 8:33pm:


usual drivel that I have come to expect from you.  the $5 cost will disadvantage who exactly?  who cannot afford $5?  the people who are unemployed yet manage to keep expensive mobile phone plans etc?  the $5 payment is designed to stop wasting doctors time on people coming for little reason.

and you private health objection is not based on good finance at all  - which is why labor didn't dump it.  they too knew that it cost too much in public health funding increases.  and it wasn't because they promised not to change it as labor broke many many MAJOR promises.

you hate 'private' anything be it schools or health.  you claim cost savings which are illusory while ignoring performance criteria which are superior on the private side.

Dnarever wrote on Dec 29^th, 2013 at 7:28am:

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 30^th, 2013 at 12:43pm:

I asked you a question, which I have highlighted. ANSWER IT. Don't make up crap.

Quote:

Usual clueless rubbish from you. Are you being wilfully ignorant or are you just clueless? It's a BROKEN PROMISE. Abbott's putting up the cost of living after he said he wouldn't.

Quote:

Non sequitur.

Quote:

That's the "official" reason. The real reason is Abbott's first step in destroying Medicare to satisfy his foreign masters.

Quote:

"many MAJOR promises"? Bahahaha! Prove it - of course you can't because this just another one of your untenable lies.

Quote:

You are a liar. Once again, you have been caught out lying. If you think you are not, you show me, right here, right now, where I have specifically said this. You cannot because I have not. Stop LYING.

Quote:

You can't talk, you make up all sorts of rubbish claims an average of 5 times a day at least.

Bam wrote on Dec 30^th, 2013 at 4:25pm:



and it is when you say crap like the highlighted that you look like a one-tooth bogan married to his sister.  you are either being disingenuous or really, really stupid.  Which is it???