Medicare rebate cut by $20 - from $37.05 to $16.95 for under 10 min consult
- Thread starter Beanie Girl
- Start date
It's interesting the co-payment idea has been implemented previously by a Labor government:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-07/catherine-king-gp-co-payment-claim-overreach/5421798
It would be interesting to know how much the medicare levy surcharge would need to be raised as an alternative policy. Currently the MLS rate is 1%, 1.25% or 1.5% depending on income. What if increasing this to 1.1%, 1.35% and 1.6% would cover the amount of funds they are trying to raise. Would that be acceptable? I wonder if this was considered?
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-07/catherine-king-gp-co-payment-claim-overreach/5421798
It would be interesting to know how much the medicare levy surcharge would need to be raised as an alternative policy. Currently the MLS rate is 1%, 1.25% or 1.5% depending on income. What if increasing this to 1.1%, 1.35% and 1.6% would cover the amount of funds they are trying to raise. Would that be acceptable? I wonder if this was considered?
The point isn't to raise the $7 or $5 or whatever; it's to stop people using the doctor unnecessarily and incurring the $37.05 payment that the government makes to the doctor.
Unless there's some cost to patients at the point of consultation, users - particularly those who presently enjoy bulk-billing - will over-use services that they see as "free".
Bulk billing is absurd and has to end; nobody should have it. (Those concerned it drives people to the ER: I'd support those visits attracting a payment per visit, too.)
Is there any actual evidence to support this view? Personally, I might go to a doctor on average once every two years or so. I only ever go to bulk-billed doctors because I don't have a regular GP. I only go if I have to, not because it's free. That said, I no objection at all in paying a co-payment. I would just want to make sure that low income earners, pensioners and the unemployed are not disadvantaged. Further to that, I can see the feds might be a bit sus of a doctor smashing out 10 patients per hour, day in a day out. What level of care would that be? It's good for me though because I know a local bulk billing GP that is perfect for that. Him: what do you need today? Me: flu shot. Him: great, here is your prescription. 4 minutes and I am out of there.
I won't bet on it happening again anytime soon.Actually something you and I agree on (looking for lightening bolts
I don't have data, because I don't know if there have ever been any opportunities to collect any. I can only offer:
1) My previous observation regarding the huge decline in prescriptions when a very modest co-payment was introduced.
2) My doctor reporting that his appointments after the May Budget announcement last year immediately dropped by more than 30%, even though the changes weren't actually introduced and he doesn't bulk-bill anyway. This suggests there's some major over-servicing going on, and people are more willing to use services they perceive as "free" than if they perceive they're paying for them. I heard of several local friends, who usually would have to wait a few days to see their GP (usually not a problem), who got cold-call advertising in those weeks after the Budget, by their local GP, who "has appointments open today!"
3) When I worked in the pharmacy, adjoining the local doctors' surgery, there were many, many patients - nearly all aged pensioners - who would go to the doctor once or twice a week, every single week. I think many of them used it as an excuse to get out of the house and get human interaction.
I agree that the vast majority of people - pensioners and non-pensioners - don't do this, but the small number of people who do it, really cost us a heap, because they go so very often.Hilarious!
Anecdotally, I have heard of this too. I wonder how big the problem is and if there are alternatives to address the problem? The current approach seems to be quite a blunt instrument. In some ways, the $5 co-payment would have been preferable, so maybe we can thank the senate for this outcome?3) When I worked in the pharmacy, adjoining the local doctors' surgery, there were many, many patients - nearly all aged pensioners - who would go to the doctor once or twice a week, every single week. I think many of them used it as an excuse to get out of the house and get human interaction.
I know there was a stink about the $5 co-payment at the time because $5 would stop really sick people from seeing their GP. I guess it all comes down to priorities. I would not go and see The Hobbit last night because I found out it would cost $40 for two people. Unrelated, but I recently had a cyst removed from my scalp at no cost from a bulk billing doctor. Personally, I would not pay $40 for two people to see a movie, but I would pay $40 to have a cyst removed. I wonder how many people would see the movie but not pay $5 to see a doctor if they were really sick? Priorities.
It was $7, and the government was offering an increase in the social security benefits to cover paid visits - I think it was $7 per fortnight and if you went over 25 times in a year, the rest attracted no co-payment? - such that no social security recipient could possibly have been worse off.
The kicker, of course, is that it would still require sufficient money management skills to have the $7 when needed.
I thought it was bargained down to $5 to get it through the senate.
I wouldn't be happy to trust my health to a fresh off boat "GP" from the back of Bangladesh who doesn't speak English and does not know the difference between a kangaroo or a can of poo. Sure you can employ them for $40k a year but you get what you pay for.
Or spend most of their pay on cigarettes and alcohol but refuse to pay the GP one cent to treat their lung cancer or breathing disorder?
Putting the $7 in context, I was at place the other day that charged $11.50 for a pint. There seemed to be a lot of people buying a lot of pints. It makes you wonder...
I'd like to see people who use BB doctors pay a contribution for their trip to the doctor. Those of us who visit a full-fee charging doctor spend about $30 a visit, sometimes more. Under the new scheme we will pay even more.
It's about time the high-turnover users start to make a contribution. The alternative, when the bleeding heart public screams about this, will be to increase the medicare levy, which is what Treasury (?) was suggesting last year. Guess what? Children and pensioners don't pay a medicare levy, taxpayers do. You and I pay it and I don't hear the pensioners complaining when it is suggested that the levy increase. Guess what else? The average taxpayer doesn't use GPs anywhere near as much as the average pensioners do.
I never had a problem with the last scheme - to charge a small co-payment for a certain number of visits per year. Taxpayers would have to pay the co payment too, but I suspect (I haven't checked it) it would be cheaper than increasing the levy for the people who pay it. $70 a year for everybody compared to hundreds of $$ for about a third of the population.
It's about time the high-turnover users start to make a contribution. The alternative, when the bleeding heart public screams about this, will be to increase the medicare levy, which is what Treasury (?) was suggesting last year. Guess what? Children and pensioners don't pay a medicare levy, taxpayers do. You and I pay it and I don't hear the pensioners complaining when it is suggested that the levy increase. Guess what else? The average taxpayer doesn't use GPs anywhere near as much as the average pensioners do.
I never had a problem with the last scheme - to charge a small co-payment for a certain number of visits per year. Taxpayers would have to pay the co payment too, but I suspect (I haven't checked it) it would be cheaper than increasing the levy for the people who pay it. $70 a year for everybody compared to hundreds of $$ for about a third of the population.
I use a Bulk Bill Doctor. You have to make an appointment. You never have to wait long. The Doctor is fantastic. It is only on a Monday morning that the Clinic is full.
I am a self funded retiree these days. This is the only thing I get without paying. My prescriptions now cost me in excess of $200 a month. That's the problem with getting old I do not get a Healthcare card or any reductions in phone, registration etc. I do get the Seniors Card which gives me reduced public transport. I would far prefer a discount on my prescriptions.
I can no longer claim excess medical expenses on my tax. That was abolished
This is the reward you get for successfully providing for yourself in old age
Chris
I am a self funded retiree these days. This is the only thing I get without paying. My prescriptions now cost me in excess of $200 a month. That's the problem with getting old
I do not get a Healthcare card or any reductions in phone, registration etc. I do get the Seniors Card which gives me reduced public transport. I would far prefer a discount on my prescriptions.I can no longer claim excess medical expenses on my tax. That was abolished
This is the reward you get for successfully providing for yourself in old age
Chris
Zowie! Just saw this article online in The Guardian. Just a few hours old.
Doctors are hopping mad!
http://www.theguardian.com/australi...n-protest-at-plan-b-proposed-medicare-changes
"Doctors are planning public demonstrations over the Abbott government's proposed Medicare changes as they ramp up a lobbying campaign against a policy they claim is the greatest threat to general practice in a decade.
The Australian Medical Association's president, Brian Owler, told Guardian Australia doctors were planning public rallies in Sydney, Brisbane and possibly Canberra in early February to demonstrate their "extreme unhappiness" with the government's health "plan B" unveiled shortly before Christmas.
..................
"I have not seen doctors this angry in more than a decade," Owler said, outlining a campaign that includes posters and information packages in GP surgeries, organised lobbying of local members and a series of public demonstrations which he predicted would be attended by "hundreds if not thousands of doctors".
Doctors are most angry about a plan to reduce the rebate for consultations lasting less than 10 minutes by $20, from $37 to $16.95, which takes effect from 16 January and according to the doctors will cost GPs $500m this year.
.........................
The rebate cut can be disallowed by the Senate, but neither Labor nor the Greens have made a decision about whether they will vote against it.
"If they are serious about saving Medicare they will vote to disallow it," Owler said. "I would be shocked if they didn't".
Doctors are hopping mad!
http://www.theguardian.com/australi...n-protest-at-plan-b-proposed-medicare-changes
"Doctors are planning public demonstrations over the Abbott government's proposed Medicare changes as they ramp up a lobbying campaign against a policy they claim is the greatest threat to general practice in a decade.
The Australian Medical Association's president, Brian Owler, told Guardian Australia doctors were planning public rallies in Sydney, Brisbane and possibly Canberra in early February to demonstrate their "extreme unhappiness" with the government's health "plan B" unveiled shortly before Christmas.
..................
"I have not seen doctors this angry in more than a decade," Owler said, outlining a campaign that includes posters and information packages in GP surgeries, organised lobbying of local members and a series of public demonstrations which he predicted would be attended by "hundreds if not thousands of doctors".
Doctors are most angry about a plan to reduce the rebate for consultations lasting less than 10 minutes by $20, from $37 to $16.95, which takes effect from 16 January and according to the doctors will cost GPs $500m this year.
.........................
The rebate cut can be disallowed by the Senate, but neither Labor nor the Greens have made a decision about whether they will vote against it.
"If they are serious about saving Medicare they will vote to disallow it," Owler said. "I would be shocked if they didn't".
I think the average citizen are completely 'in the dark' about all these upcoming changes.
It was all announced just before Christmas and only vaguely, with not much detail. Broad sketches.
It was all announced just before Christmas and only vaguely, with not much detail. Broad sketches.
I think the average citizen are completely 'in the dark' about all these upcoming changes.
.
I think the average citizen are completely 'in the dark' about the fact that the government doesn't have enough income and its only going to get worse from where.
We are in for a time of structural change for Australia. The 2000 decade of good times and spread the good will is well and truly over.
Beanie girl is complaining about this issue,
Others are complaining about cuts to foreign aid budgets,
Others are complaining about cuts to advocacy bodies (could never understand this one, why does the government fund an advocacy body that just spends its time hyping its particular issue),
there is one more to come, with the reduction in oil/coal prices, its just a matter of time before the renewable energy sector starts really jumping up and down.
Welcome to the new party.
Oh you cant ask these sought of tough questions.
It should be the governments job to come up with the magic funds right????
The government should be forced to do something, after all that's what a voters power is right????
If the government cant magic up the funds, we will vote in another government that can.
That's the people power right?????
