8. Hon TONY RYALL (National—Bay of Plenty) Link to this
to the Minister of Health
What reports has he received, if any, on possible impacts on patients of planned charging for laboratory tests originating from private specialists in the Wellington region, and does the Government support this charging?
Hon PETE HODGSON (Minister of Health) Link to this
I have seen reports that the Wellington region district health boards feel that making this change is correcting a historical anomaly that was diverting resources from patients who rely solely on the public health system. From the Government’s perspective, I have told district health board chief executives that we must have national consistency on this policy to ensure fairness from region to region.
So is the Minister saying that it is the Government’s intention that charging patients for tests ordered by private specialists will be implemented by all district health boards; if so, when does he expect this to be implemented by?
Needless to say, the Wellington changes will occur first, and there will be some learning by doing, no doubt. District health board chief executives are next due to discuss this issue at their November meeting.
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. My question was quite clear. I asked whether it was the Minister’s intention that all district health boards will charge, and I think it is important that he answers that specific question.
Madam SPEAKERAs the member knows, there is no requirement for a yes or no answer. However, the Minister did address the question; I listened very carefully to it.
Maryan StreetWhat is the likely annual savings resulting from various laboratory changes made in the Wellington region?
The total annual savings is in the order of $6 million to $7 million per annum, part of which is due to the planned changes to laboratory tests originating in the private sector. All of that money is now available to be reinvested back into the health of local people within the Wellington region.
Barbara StewartDoes the Minister share the concerns of the New Zealand Medical Association chairman, Ross Boswell, that the imposition of charges could result in people choosing to get their tests done by their already overburdened general practitioners, possibly resulting in compromised care; if not, why not?
I have met with Dr Boswell on a number of occasions on this matter and other matters, and, yes, he raised a valid point of view. It is almost certainly overstated when one considers, for example, that CAT scans, X-rays, and ultrasounds are already funded privately. All of those things cost a good deal less, on average, than do laboratory services.
What would the Minister say to an uninsured woman who has a lump in her breast, for which she is prepared to pay, say, $500 to see a specialist in order to find out whether she has cancer, when that woman will now face paying over $250 extra for laboratory tests in order to find out whether she has cancer?
I just point out to the member that the average cost of laboratory tests is well less than that—usually well under $50 for a range of tests, but some tests cost more than $200. But I would point out to the woman that if she persists with the private sector and needs a mastectomy, the cost to her will be probably $13,000. That gives members some perspective.
Dr Jackie BlueWhat would the Minister say to a man with suspected prostate cancer—a cancer that is mostly treated in private hospitals and that is predicted to steadily increase in the next 5 years—when he is told that he will be facing additional costs well over $500; and how does the Minister think that that might affect public urology waiting lists?
The cost of prostatic cancer testing is a mere fraction of that which the member would have this House believe.
What will the Minister say to a person who needs a cardiac bypass and is considering going private, thereby reducing the burden on the public sector waiting list, but is informed that he or she will have to pay thousands of dollars extra; and does the Minister think that this might be a tipping point for that person to decide to go public instead?
I would point out that various tests that people face, whether they are receiving cardiac surgery in the private sector or any other surgery—including those that I listed for the member from New Zealand First—are already paid for privately, and already cost a great deal more. This change—which was examined carefully by Bill English when he was Minister of Health, and he was not in the job long enough to go through with it; and it was examined on 1 July by Wyatt Creech when he was Minister of Health, and he was not in the job long enough to go ahead with it, either—simply removes a historic anomaly.
If it is a historic anomaly that private patients pay for some tests, and because the public pays for diagnostic tests they should pay for that as well, is the Minister also saying it is an anomaly that private patients should receive subsidy for their pharmaceuticals, as well?
Strictly speaking one could argue that, but, of course, the Government has no intention of making treatment—[ Interruption] The National Party might, because it has exorbitant tax cuts on its mind; it will have to do something in order to save the money. This Government invests in health, and it draws a distinction quite clearly between testing and treatment.