PDA

View Full Version : NHS Tourists, Passports and All That


Harold Gough
22nd November 2016, 10:49 AM
I have yet to hear any mention of medical cards. We used to have to present them, at reception, prior to every consultation with a GP.

Harold

iso
22nd November 2016, 06:11 PM
I have yet to hear any mention of medical cards. We used to have to present them, at reception, prior to every consultation with a GP.

Harold

Harold, I seem to remember that you also had to carry your Gas Mask 'at all times' :D- BUT I actually think this is a good idea - why not? Note the BMA is not liking the idea, but given at every step (quite rightly) your name and DOB are checked before any procedure, can't see the objection :mad:

Ian
22nd November 2016, 06:19 PM
The NHS don't want the responsibility of billing people. There also seems to be a big difference in opinion regarding how much is being left unbilled - NHS representatives I have seen on the news today think it is only £200 million an year and so uneconomical to collect but the government thinks it's £2 billion. I suspect it's somewhere inbetween.

I had no objection to ID cards when that idea was being floated and then the civil liberties movement stamped on it. Surely this is an excellent example of where such a card would have worked very well.

Ian

Harold Gough
22nd November 2016, 06:27 PM
Harold, I seem to remember that you also had to carry your Gas Mask 'at all times' :D-

I wouldn't know. I was born in April 1945. Do tell us more! :D

I was allotted a hospital number, in our local general hospital, when I was a child. Surely that has some purpose? I have an NHS number on my medical card, which differs from the one on my first card, issued, presumably, in 1948.

Surely, that is more secure, in terms of entitlement to treatment than a passport, of which fakes are readily available online.

Just to be clear, I have a valid passport, which I had to produce for face to face access to my own solicitor, and I have lots of utility bills.

Harold

drmarkf
22nd November 2016, 06:30 PM
If one actually listens to the whole of what Mark Porter said (not just what is being reported selectively by the usual right-wing press suspects), the BMA's main objection is that this is another smokescreen covering up the massive and planned underfunding of the NHS by the current administration.

There is additionally a complex argument about whether it is actually financially worthwhile spending the (cut) NHS's resources in collecting it: that should be answerable with an [unbiased] technical review, but good luck with getting one of those in the current post-factual climate.

[It's like all the Daily Fail obsession with benefit fraud. Yes it happens, but independent assessments of the sums involved are less than the amounts withdrawn from needy people as an unintended consequence. Also vastly less than the amounts of tax avoided by the very wealthy.]

"A man hears what he wants to hear..." yet again :rolleyes:

iso
22nd November 2016, 07:18 PM
If one actually listens to the whole of what Mark Porter said (not just what is being reported selectively by the usual right-wing press suspects), the BMA's main objection is that this is another smokescreen covering up the massive and planned underfunding of the NHS by the current administration.

There is additionally a complex argument about whether it is actually financially worthwhile spending the (cut) NHS's resources in collecting it: that should be answerable with an [unbiased] technical review, but good luck with getting one of those in the current post-factual climate.

[It's like all the Daily Fail obsession with benefit fraud. Yes it happens, but independent assessments of the sums involved are less than the amounts withdrawn from needy people as an unintended consequence. Also vastly less than the amounts of tax avoided by the very wealthy.]

"A man hears what he wants to hear..." yet again :rolleyes:

Em Mark, maybe you are just losing the thread on this Thread. Not aware that anyone is using it to agree or disagree with current levels of NHS funding. One of the points I made was that personal identification is a standard procedure – shouldn’t that include WHO you are?

Naughty Nigel
22nd November 2016, 10:18 PM
Yet another layer of bureaucracy in the NHS. That's all we need. :(

drmarkf
22nd November 2016, 11:26 PM
No, I've got no problem whatsoever with identifying people and charging those who should be charged as long as the amount recovered is projected to be higher than the costs in time and money to our overstretched NHS of doing that.

Surely you can't have a problem with that?

The problem is that the idea is being pushed with the assumption that it is worthwhile, and the BMA objections are being misrepresented. No real assessment is being expected.

Would you be happy to have public money that you have contributed being wasted on this if it was actually not financially worthwhile? Would you therefore willingly give up your hip replacement in order for cash and managerial input to be devoted to recovering money from health tourists?

Hence my point that if you know the background the whole issue is intimately and inseparably connected with NHS funding.

Welcome to the daft world of public service funding with (currently reducing in real terms) cash limits!

Ricoh
23rd November 2016, 12:24 AM
An argument against deciding who to treat is one of public health. For example, if a foreigner in the uk is suffering from TB, is it better to treat, or not? Treat one irrespective of rights, or treat umpteen more who come into contact unwittingly.

Edit: I have a different opinion if they visit for a hip replacement, heart surgery etc, etc.

timboo
23rd November 2016, 06:46 AM
Will be interesting to see how the proposals success/failure is measured over time. Wonder if records will b kept.
I'd also like to see what type of medical conditions fall under this umbrella as Im sure urgent care will still be given in which case will people wise up and manipulate symptoms to receive care.

Harold Gough
23rd November 2016, 07:52 AM
One of the points I made was that personal identification is a standard procedure – shouldn’t that include WHO you are?

It happens that, a few weeks ago, in an NHS hospital outpatients clinic, my wife and I witnessed this. A nurse found that two Asian patients in the waiting room, to see the same consultant, had exactly the same name. It seems that this was something she had not come across before.

Harold

Ian
23rd November 2016, 07:53 AM
An argument against deciding who to treat is one of public health. For example, if a foreigner in the uk is suffering from TB, is it better to treat, or not? Treat one irrespective of rights, or treat umpteen more who come into contact unwittingly.

Edit: I have a different opinion if they visit for a hip replacement, heart surgery etc, etc.

The TB one is a tricky example as it's a (as I understand) a very long process to treat. But you'd want to minimise the risk of spreading the disease.

Blatant 'health tourism' is of course wrong and needs to be tackled. It was significant factor in the Brexit debate. But I always suspected it was a relatively minor issue and even if you take the most extreme (and therefore, unlikely) cost estimate of £2 billion per year, that's less than 2 percent of the annual NHS budget. It's a lot of money but hardly enough to justify throwing away all the other benefits we currently get from Europe and on top of that the reason why there is this problem is really down to us (not dealing with it) than Europe.

Ian

drmarkf
23rd November 2016, 08:02 AM
It happens that, a few weeks ago, in an NHS hospital outpatients clinic, my wife and I witnessed this. A nurse found that two Asian patients in the waiting room, to see the same consultant, had exactly the same name. It seems that this was something she had not come across before.

Harold

Really? Just how many John Smiths has she come across in her career, one wonders, and so how many clinics with two or more in?

timboo
23rd November 2016, 08:15 AM
Really? Just how many John Smiths has she come across in her career, one wonders, and so how many clinics with two or more in?

Or how many twins?

The approach is in its first stage and over time will evolve once the human rights people have spoke up

drmarkf
23rd November 2016, 08:53 AM
This is genuinely a more complicated issue than the tabloids are presenting: the world is a very simple place for them.

For an example of the real position, a couple of paras from the Indie (including from the chair of the Public Accounts Committee), plus an interesting point about our own international 'health tourists'!:

"PAC chairwoman Meg Hillier expressed concern about British residents that don't have photo ID and those who would struggle to find a utility bill. “I have constituents who have no photo IDs,” she said.

“Because they have never travelled they have no passport, they have no driver's licence because they have never driven, they still live at home because they can't afford to move out so they've never had a utility bill in their name. (They are) perfectly entitled to health care – British born, British resident - how are you going to make sure that people have access easily to the National Health Service without having to go through a very humiliating and impossible to meet set of demands?”

There are different rules for charging visitors from the European Economic Area (EEA) and Switzerland and from those outside the EEA. Visitors from the EEA are usually covered by agreements under which their home country pays for treatment.

But there are big differences between the amount of money other European countries claim from the UK and how much the UK pays out, the Committee heard.

The Committee drew on official figures released earlier this year show that in 2014/15, £674m was charged to the UK government for the care of British citizens abroad. But the amount charged for the care of EEA nationals in British hospitals was just £49m.

Mr Wormald said the figure was “hugely driven” by the number of UK pensioners who live abroad. There are 62 Spanish pensioners living in the UK compared to 70,000 British retirees living in Spain, said Mr Wormald."

Ricoh
23rd November 2016, 09:17 AM
Given the € exchange rate, some of those 70,000 may return - with sun damage requiring NHS treatment!

drmarkf
23rd November 2016, 09:34 AM
An orange tide :D

BTW 20% UK residents don't own a passport, and they cost £72.50.

Harold Gough
23rd November 2016, 09:40 AM
An orange tide :D

A marmalade tsunami! :D

Harold

DerekW
23rd November 2016, 12:54 PM
My experience of the gatekeepers to the NHS service are pretty ferocious in determining whether you are really ill enough to see the GP, adding id checking would be an easy addition to their tasks.

WE should reduce the amount of money sent abroad as foreign aid and put it into the NHS to cover the cost of health tourism.

iso
23rd November 2016, 09:08 PM
This is genuinely a more complicated issue than the tabloids are presenting: the world is a very simple place for them.

For an example of the real position, a couple of paras from the Indie (including from the chair of the Public Accounts Committee), plus an interesting point about our own international 'health tourists'!:

"PAC chairwoman Meg Hillier expressed concern about British residents that don't have photo ID and those who would struggle to find a utility bill. “I have constituents who have no photo IDs,” she said.

“Because they have never travelled they have no passport, they have no driver's licence because they have never driven, they still live at home because they can't afford to move out so they've never had a utility bill in their name. (They are) perfectly entitled to health care – British born, British resident - how are you going to make sure that people have access easily to the National Health Service without having to go through a very humiliating and impossible to meet set of demands?”

There are different rules for charging visitors from the European Economic Area (EEA) and Switzerland and from those outside the EEA. Visitors from the EEA are usually covered by agreements under which their home country pays for treatment.

But there are big differences between the amount of money other European countries claim from the UK and how much the UK pays out, the Committee heard.

The Committee drew on official figures released earlier this year show that in 2014/15, £674m was charged to the UK government for the care of British citizens abroad. But the amount charged for the care of EEA nationals in British hospitals was just £49m.

Mr Wormald said the figure was “hugely driven” by the number of UK pensioners who live abroad. There are 62 Spanish pensioners living in the UK compared to 70,000 British retirees living in Spain, said Mr Wormald."

MARK - You obviously know your subject in great detail, that does not necessarily make you right :(

Wee man
24th November 2016, 01:27 AM
Daughter lives in Southern Ireland €25 to see doctor €25 for writing script cost at chemist depends on what is on script. €100 to be seen in A&E!

Friend collapsed in car in the South I got him an ambulance rushed unconscious to nearest hospital A&E first thing we saw was a sign A&E € 100! Nine hours later released after large number of tests X-rays and CT scan. Down to a vagus attack?
Bill? Nothing but had to prove he was not resident in the south. ?????


On a lighter note at my ENT appointment at local hospital I had my passport with me and jokingly said to the the consultant( a friend) " I suppose you will want to see this then"?
And handed him my passport.
I did not know a rectal enema was good for ear problems - one for each ear also.

Wee Man

Ricoh
24th November 2016, 11:24 AM
Too funny Wee Man :)

Naughty Nigel
24th November 2016, 12:25 PM
There are 62 Spanish pensioners living in the UK compared to 70,000 British retirees living in Spain, said Mr Wormald."

Really? *susp

I find that very difficult to believe.

Actually, our Postie is Spanish, and very pleasant he is too.

I really have no idea whether health tourism is a real problem for the NHS, but even if it is, does it really justify yet another layer of expensive bureaucracy to deal with it?

Not only would it take years to set up, but would probably become like the old Dog Licence, (£0/10/- a year), and the Car Radio Licence, (£5/-/- a year) that in typical government fashion ended up costing far more to administer than they ever collected. :rolleyes:

In my view it would be much more profitable to charge NHS customers with self inflicted conditions for their treatment. However, I would allow a modest staff discount for the many morbidly obese NHS employees having weight loss surgery. *yes

Ricoh
24th November 2016, 12:49 PM
I'm guessing your postie isn't a Spanish pensioner.

If the cost of administering the passport for medical treatment is cost neutral, it's worth it as a deterrent.

Harold Gough
24th November 2016, 01:59 PM
I'm guessing your postie isn't a Spanish pensioner.

If the cost of administering the passport for medical treatment is cost neutral, it's worth it as a deterrent.

Mainly for Muslim women, who won't want to match the passport photo to their face?

Harold

Naughty Nigel
24th November 2016, 02:44 PM
I'm guessing your postie isn't a Spanish pensioner.

Not yet for a good many years I would imagine, but he and his family are settled here now, so I daresay he will retire at some point.