Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Sajid Javid states patients should pay a fee for GPs and A&E visits

232 replies

MushMonster · 21/01/2023 08:40

Just woke up this morning to this

www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jan/20/sajid-javid-calls-for-patients-to-pay-for-gp-and-ae-visits

I so wish we could get early elections.
I had more than enough of this lot!
They will use the strikes to push in policies like this before we can chuck them out, following Thatcher's model to the letter.

OP posts:
Hintofreality · 21/01/2023 10:31

Will you get a refund in the case of misdiagnosis?
A relative of mine made repeated visits to their GP, each time being told their Stage 3 Bowel Cancer was nothing more than IBS.

Sakura7 · 21/01/2023 10:32

Tremblingtigers · 21/01/2023 10:27

Question about the Irish model! What happens if you attend A&E with a genuine emergency? Or a perceived genuine emergency? My child is disabled and can get into respiratory problems quite quickly; I’ve taken them to A&E and we’ve ended up in PICU, and I’ve been been sent home as it’s just a cold. I’m good at assessing my kid but I needed a medical professional to check her sats and listen to her chest and decide if she needs emergency care or not. Our GP and consultant has told us to not go to primary care, if we’re worried it’s straight to A&E. Would we be charged?

As far as I know, you wouldn't have to pay for a child as they'd have a medical card. People with certain conditions and disabilities would qualify for medical cards too.

ArseInTheCoOpWindow · 21/01/2023 10:33

We already pay for dentists anyway ( if you can find one) Those fees are really high even on the NHS.

renonovice · 21/01/2023 10:34

@Stunningscreamer

I earned about £8 an hour working in a shop in the late 90s. The same job probably pays £11/12 now if you are lucky, that doesn't mean I'm earning more money though. I'm earning less because £8 was worth more. The true equivalent of that £8 is £14/£15.

Stunningscreamer · 21/01/2023 10:34

renonovice · 21/01/2023 10:28

@Stunningscreamer it's makes a difference because the value of money going down & assets going up. You can't compare the value of one salary from years ago to now.

The point is people used to pay a lot more income tax as a proportion of their salary.

when did people pay more tax as a proportion of their salary? When is the last time income tax bands for the higher rate moved?

I'm talking about basic rate tax, not higher rate tax, so why are you asking about higher rate tax? It's not about comparing the value of money it's about the proportion that everyone puts into the services that run the country. If you have high inflation that's also going to put up the costs of running the services, hence we still have to pay for them. We can't just say that I'm not going to fund public services because the income I get now would have bought more if I'd got it in the year 2000.

renonovice · 21/01/2023 10:35

@Stunningscreamer but why do you think the basic rate band shouldn't move up?

renonovice · 21/01/2023 10:36

We can't just say that I'm not going to fund public services because the income I get now would have bought more if I'd got it in the year 2000.

Your point was about tax though & people paying more tax in the past. I asked when because the point is tax bands should increase, I'm not sure why you think they shouldn't?

renonovice · 21/01/2023 10:37

It's not about comparing the value of money it's about the proportion that everyone puts into the services that run the country

Of course wage stagnation & a shrinking tax paying population is important when you are talking about increasing taxes...

Headunderthecovers · 21/01/2023 10:38

In Opticians they have a mixed NHS and Private system -like Dentistry but the cost of glasses effectively funds the low eye test NHS cost to the government so it's still easy to get NHS care.

The people who get NHS tests who fail to arrive for appointments are by the vast majority kids (dependent on parents bringing them) and those of working age and in work or not in receipt of an NHS test entitlement under the low income category.
The over 60s who also get NHS care are the most reliable to turn up and are by far the biggest category and more frequent users of free NHS eye tests and then referral on to the hospital.

Funding via private paying eye tests only (opting out of NHS) is happening increasingly at some independent opticians (like dentists) as the hassle of administering the NHS claim for the eye test paid to the opticians company by the government is difficult and time consuming. If this continues there will effectively be a two tier system with easy access for those paying and a selected number of NHS providers such as Specsavers.

Like dentists this a part of the NHS also under private control and also isn't a model for success as the glasses cost is the reason NHS eye care exists. If everyone bought their glasses online say then the private companies wouldn't fund an effective loss leader of an NHS eye test.

There is an issue that the fewer users of the service are the ones paying the fee so this isn't enough to make a difference and it doesn't affect people not turning up for their appointments .

The vast majority do turn up for secondary care hospital appointments- but if they don't because hospital eye care is so busy missing an appointment means you are discharged from hospital care and have to be re referred by your GP or optician.

This model shows that paying for a certain proportion of the working population for NHS care doesn't make the hospitals less busy and those who don't turn up less frequent as the reason for not attending is more complex and as others say the model with exempt the vast majority of the service users anyway.
It would be a drop in the ocean.

I do agree we are an ageing population and the NHS increasing provides treatment that wasn't available years ago.
For instance there's an ageing eye condition called wet macula degeneration where the bi monthly injections would cost £1,000 a time and some people have had 30+ (plus the cost of the appointment).

This treatment wasn't available 20 years ago and those developed the condition lost all their central vision in the affected eye and if both eyes their sight. Macula degeneration is an ageing eye disease (as are a lot of the eye diseases )so hospital eye departments have to have more funding and this department of the hospital as it's one of the busiest.

The NHS care is amazing and we should be wary of any charge introduction.
I would agree with cross party talks on what is funded .
The NHS over 60 free test was brought in because the social care cost is more from people developing advanced eye disease and potentially going blind than funding for primary care for the most at risk category (including diabetics and those with a family history of glaucoma are also funded for NHS sight tests).

Social care is the issue. I've encountered this with my parents. No one wants to face they need to look at then fund by giving up their property for the cost of care/nursing homes and this makes the process of discharge from hospital slower.
There's suddenly the prospect of looking at homes at short notice and family helping make a decision. Often the elderly person is understandably reluctant to go into care initially making return hospital admissions more likely.
I think we should be looking more at social care models for the elderly in other countries and as individuals thinking about what health we will be in and preparing for a change that inevitably will happen.
Why don't we build more bungalows and have models for keeping elderly people from needing in patient hospital care from falls?

Perhaps the old 'cottage hospitals' to come back into existence with less doctors but a higher ratio of nurses for those who can't go to a care home yet, but aren't well enough to go home but also don't need a main hospital bed. This relies on a great nursing team which we should absolutely fund appropriately (the younger ones have student loans and it is not well paid for the responsibility and stress of lack of staff).

A dedicated GP who can deal with multiple chronic conditions more personally. The issue with accessing GP care is in some part that there are increasing elderly service users taking up multiple appointments- could this be reduced by any known person dealing with their care. We'd certainly need to recognise we need to fund and value our GPs.

Sorry for the length - I appear to have written a dissertation Confused

Exhausteddog · 21/01/2023 10:39

Under-investment
Larger population
Poor working conditions/morale
Inefficient systems/waste within the NHS
Brexit
Medical staff leaving (some to work overseas)
People abusing the system/missing apts
People living longer
People with unhealthy lifestyles eg smoking, drugs, obesity etc
Lack of social care

All of these are contributory factors why the NHS can't function efficiently/optimally, I can't see how you would begin to even to address all of them. Throwing more money at the NHS will only alleviate some of the issues as seen with the Nightingale hospitals. They were all well and good until it was pointed out they needed to be staffed adequately!

Stunningscreamer · 21/01/2023 10:44

renonovice · 21/01/2023 10:34

@Stunningscreamer

I earned about £8 an hour working in a shop in the late 90s. The same job probably pays £11/12 now if you are lucky, that doesn't mean I'm earning more money though. I'm earning less because £8 was worth more. The true equivalent of that £8 is £14/£15.

Yes and you'll probably not pay much tax at all because of the personal allowance. The proportion of tax you'll pay on your salary will be lower than someone on £30k.

Also you're talking about a 25% drop in real time earnings, which is compared to a more than 50% drop in taxation.

Stunningscreamer · 21/01/2023 10:50

renonovice · 21/01/2023 10:35

@Stunningscreamer but why do you think the basic rate band shouldn't move up?

I didn't say that. I said we shouldn't have had such a large cut in basic rate taxation if we're also saying we don't want to pay for anything in other taxes, such as inheritance tax, or in payment for services ourselves. It's basic budgeting.

I'd be happy to pay more taxes. I'd also be happy to fund a proportion of any social care I need. I also think it's reasonable to pay inheritance tax. Because I don't want people to be lying waiting for an ambulance for eight hours. If you think that's okay, then we've got different values.

MarshaBradyo · 21/01/2023 10:51

Social care is the issue. I've encountered this with my parents. No one wants to face they need to look at then fund by giving up their property for the cost of care/nursing homes and this makes the process of discharge from hospital slower.

I agree social care is a big factor. Solve that and improve population health via personal responsibility and two mai issues would decrease pressure on NHS

renonovice · 21/01/2023 10:51

Yes and you'll probably not pay much tax at all because of the personal allowance. The proportion of tax you'll pay on your salary will be lower than someone on £30k.

I don't understood what point you are making here.

Also you're talking about a 25% drop in real time earnings, which is compared to a more than 50% drop in taxation.

When was tax 50% higher?

EarthPunchingBack · 21/01/2023 10:52

All the people saying they’re going to be “double paying” do understand that those in systems such as Germany also pay taxes?

I think a first point of call might be a HUGE education campaign on taxation and actual costs of public services because there are some bloody weird conclusions being drawn by some posters on here and it really worries me.

ginghamstarfish · 21/01/2023 10:55

In theory it's a good idea, it is certainly they way in many countries and they have better healthcare than we do, and people are not dying in the streets because they could not afford to go. But of course it means a radical reform of the whole system, plus taxation and NI etc, and what government wants to tackle that? (and no, Labour could have done so when in power, but didn't, before everyone piles on and blames the Tories alone)

renonovice · 21/01/2023 10:55

I didn't say that. I said we shouldn't have had such a large cut in basic rate taxation

So what cut would you have implemented?

Because I don't want people to be lying waiting for an ambulance for eight hours. If you think that's okay, then we've got different values.

My point is people on lower wages have seen their real incomes decline considerably over the years. I don't have an issue with changes to CGT or IHT, I think income is a big enough burden currently.

I'm not sure why you're inferring that I think it's ok to wait hours for an ambulance because of that though?

IncessantNameChanger · 21/01/2023 10:56

I'd be all for a token amount if it put off time wasters. Say £5 if your in the 20% tax bracket, free for kids and oap etc. But what would get for that? Never seeing your gp? Two - four week wait?
The cost would have to be small as you would be double paying. For £60-£80 I could see a private gp immediately who has incentive to really listen. But it's all moot when your skint snd the current gp service is a bit shit. I will save up my pre diabetes etc to cost more in the long term due to not being monitored properly

EarthPunchingBack · 21/01/2023 10:58

Even on £100k which is a huge salary, you’ll pocket 2/3 of it.

We MUST get past this idea that we pay huge taxes - it’s bollocks!

EarthPunchingBack · 21/01/2023 10:59

WE’RE NOT DOUBLE PAYING!

Aaaaaarrrrrgggghhhhhh!!!!!!

Stunningscreamer · 21/01/2023 11:03

renonovice · 21/01/2023 10:51

Yes and you'll probably not pay much tax at all because of the personal allowance. The proportion of tax you'll pay on your salary will be lower than someone on £30k.

I don't understood what point you are making here.

Also you're talking about a 25% drop in real time earnings, which is compared to a more than 50% drop in taxation.

When was tax 50% higher?

I don't understood what point you are making here.

Clearly

When was tax 50% higher

When I got my first job in 1984.

Wages have not dropped 50% in real terms since then but the basic rate of tax has dropped from 33% to 20%.

DomPom47 · 21/01/2023 11:06

Stunningscreamer · 21/01/2023 10:27

Until you need critical services which the private hospitals don't offer.

You don't get to opt out of what services you pay for. Personally I wouldn't be subsiding MPs gourmet lunches, but I can't choose to do that.

I just can’t understand why we are potentially going to be used to add a plaster to a haemorrhaging system.

if it’s a case of increasing taxes I would be fine with this, paying taxes and then paying to attend an appointment I am against.

we need a long term plan for the NHS
-more preventative measures like decent food tech lessons for all kids and decent pe lessons where kids grow up enjoying exercise and cooking healthy meals
—a solution to staffing in hospitals - not just more pay but more doctors and more nurses - bring them in from abroad if not enough young people in the UK want to enter these professions
-invest in social care to keep those who don’t need a hospital bed are not kept in hospital
-make the current system more efficient- my sister in law is a sister on a ward and the cost of things they order from the supplier lists they have is a joke - could literally get it cheaper on Amazon or High Street - like for like products
-too many managers and big wigs who have no idea what life is like on the wards

renonovice · 21/01/2023 11:07

All the people saying they’re going to be “double paying” do understand that those in systems such as Germany also pay taxes?

Isn't Germanys benefits more linked to the social taxes you pay though eg if you are unemployed you can claim a % of your salary for a year. Their version of CB isn't means tested & childcare costs are subsidised. And they have far more doctors per head than the UK

Higher taxes work when everybody gains something from them.

Hbh17 · 21/01/2023 11:07

It would be a good idea if it stopped the time-wasters who clog up the system but, sadly, I fear that the cost of administering it would be counter-productive.

Buzzinwithbez · 21/01/2023 11:09

Once we start having to use a medical insurance system, the insurance gets to dictate more of our health choices and they will do it in a very risk averse way that does not fit the individual.
This massively affects the maternity system in America and elsewhere and means that women often can't opt for the best birth choices for them and their baby. Invasive procedures go up, because they're seen as safer.

You decide you're not taking your statins because they're leaving to muscle weakness and at 50, you feel like a 70 year old when climbing the stairs? Well sadly you can't have this other quality of life improving treatment because you're not being a good little patient.