Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)

I will focus on one aspect of the motion, namely, the issue of health insurance. A decade ago, it was inconceivable that a healthy 20 year old or 30 year old would have private health insurance. This is no longer the case and this sends out the message that people in this group need insurance because they cannot afford to queue and experience delays.

The debate on reforming the health service is characterised by opposing visions. The United States model, which has been much studied by the Government, restricts public coverage to elderly and disabled people and certain groups living in poverty. According to the OECD, 71% of the US population has some form of health insurance. The alternative vision demands the establishment of a properly funded universal health service. Key to delivering this demand is the delivery of the thousands of beds called for in the motion.

Health has become a commodity discussed within the parameters of the marketplace as if it were a replacement part for a washing machine or fridge. In many ways the debate on private health insurance is the wrong discussion. While 43% of the population has private health insurance, according to the OECD, private health insurance contributes just 7.6% to the cost of health provision. We need to address the reasons for increasing reliance on private health insurance.

A review carried out in 2004 by the OECD — the same organisation which will receive €400,000 this year to review the general public service — noted that private health insurance has given rise to equality concerns and raises cost-related challenges. For example, the report points out that providers face incentives to offer preferential treatment and quicker access to private patients in public hospitals because these patients are largely treated in public hospitals where the cost of treatment is subsidised. We need a decent public service and we must end reliance on private health insurance.

See this speech in context