Paul Bradford (Fine Gael)

I wish to share time with Senator Nicky McFadden.

It gives me a sense of déjÀ vu to see Senators again debating health insurance, an issue the House debated on numerous occasions during the previous Seanad. One of the Minister's political legacies from her previous incarnation as Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment was the change she brought about in the insurance industry. She deserves credit for tackling the compensation and claims culture, which led to a reduction in premia in the general insurance field. That change was a major political success, which I wish she could replicate in the area of health insurance.

The Minister has not enjoyed as much success in her current portfolio as in her previous Department. While I appreciate that health insurance is a more difficult issue to tackle, we have debated risk equalisation for three or four years. In the meantime, BUPA decided to leave the Irish market and was taken over by the Quinn Group and the emergency legislation was introduced to close loopholes.

The House could waste time by engaging in an ideological debate on health insurance. Instead, we must ensure that every citizen has access to health care and, if he or she so wishes, private health insurance at reasonable cost. To this end, the Minister must do everything possible to encourage competition.

I do not propose to pronounce judgment on the question of whether the VHI should be privatised. We have had evidence of privatisation working in some sectors and not working in others. Our role must be to ensure genuine competition and consumer choice. Not only must we ensure that Quinn Healthcare, VIVAS Health and others survive but we must also encourage other companies to enter the health insurance market. It is interesting that consumers have a wide choice of insurers in the field of general insurance, whether vehicle, home or property insurance, whereas the number of health insurance companies is very limited. Our political ambition must be to ensure a range of health insurance providers is available to consumers.

The legislation before us follows on from earlier emergency legislation and helps to level the playing pitch for newer and smaller insurance companies. Last year, the VHI demanded the introduction of legislation to prevent what is known as cherry-picking. A degree of rebalancing has since become necessary to ensure the regulations and conditions imposed on newer companies, including VIVAS Health and Quinn Healthcare, apply to the VHI. I welcome the proposed changes in this regard.

With regard to the provision in section 3 removing the requirement that the VHI obtain ministerial consent for increases in premia, while I accept the Minister's point that the VHI board is probably best placed to make the final decision on increasing premia, the provision is akin to washing one's hands of the political responsibility for price increases. Given that the VHI is still a State company for which the Government is responsible, repealing this provision sends out the wrong signal. Either the Government is in charge of the VHI or it is not and price increases, charges and levies go to the core of its responsibilities in this area.

I welcome the legislation as it helps to rebalance the position in favour of smaller companies. This is a positive development because more competition is needed in the health insurance market, an issue which the House will debate again in the future. I ask the Minister to state her view on the future ownership of the VHI.