Photo: SAPPF CEO, Dr Simon Strachan
According to the SAPPF, the so-called B-Bill the Committee adopted last week largely ignored the input of and representations by various role players in the health sector and by the public.
In communication to its members, the organisation says the very minor amendments to the adopted Bill don’t address any of the points of concern raised by the SAPPF and other stakeholders during their presentations to the committee and have not changed the impact the Bill will have on the delivery of private healthcare.
The forum says while it is eager to participate in processes that will improve access and thus realise universal quality healthcare, failure to address concerns around Section 33 of the Bill which deals with the role of medical schemes after the introduction of NHI, reduces the opportunity to improve access, and infringes on the rights of people to make choices about how and where they access healthcare.
Section 33 states that “once NHI has been fully implemented as determined by the Minister through regulations in the Gazette, medical schemes may only offer complementary cover to services not reimbursable by the Fund.”
“This section does not promote collaboration between the public and private sectors but rather undermines this,” says SAPPF CEO, Dr Simon Strachan.
“The private sector has tools and resources that are able to increase access to care by contracting with the state. To achieve this and be sustainable, the private sector must be able to run independently with free choice of patients to access private healthcare and for medical schemes or insurance companies to provide funding.”
According to the SAPPF, the provision of healthcare must not be seen and dealt with as an isolated entity.
Bill will have an immeasurable negative effect
“Every facet of life and business has an impact on health and healthcare delivery. The NHI Bill, a funding model for a single-payer-single-provider of healthcare, will have an immeasurable negative financial impact on the national fiscus, at a time when the economic climate in South Africa is dismal, corruption in every sphere including healthcare is constantly being uncovered, loadshedding is crippling the economy and national infrastructure is crumbling. To proceed with its introduction at this time is irresponsible,” the SAPPF observed.
It stresses that as part of the national health asset, private healthcare professionals are willing and able to assist with providing healthcare to the public sector which will allow the provision of necessary healthcare services to lighten the load on the public sector.
“NHI is not required to achieve this. SAPPF unequivocally supports the right and need for universal access to quality healthcare. We do not support the NHI Bill,” the SAPPF concluded.
The Health Portfolio Committee adopted the bill with six ANC MPs and the committee’s chair voting in favour while MPs from the DA, Freedom Front Plus and the EFF voted against it. The next stage of the process to sign the Bill into law is for it to go to the National Assembly where it is expected to be passed after which it will be deliberated in the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) for consensus.
However, legal action could derail the Bill’s smooth passing before being signed into law. Trade Union Solidarity has already said that it is planning to take government and the Department of Health to court if the current version of the Bill is accepted as final.
“In the run-up to next year’s election, and in order to canvass cheap votes, the ANC government insists on pushing through this law while they are fully aware that their own system cannot support it. They are misleading South Africans by saying that the NHI will promote healthcare in South Africa while concealing the fact that healthcare is readily available, but that the officials managing these essential services do not have the political will to do what is necessary to improve the quality of health services that must be delivered,” said Peirru Marx, Solidarity’s Network Coordinator of the medical industry.