Seanad debates

Thursday, 12 January 2012

10:30 am

Photo of Sean BarrettSean Barrett (Independent)

I would like to express sympathy to the widow and family of the late John Ross, a former Member of this House, who died during the Christmas vacation. His son, Shane, is a current Member of the Dáil. Mr. Ross represented the Dublin University constituency in this House for three years.

The 40% increase in the levy on private health insurance is a problem that has arisen. During our lengthy discussion on the matter on 8 December last, I pointed out that the Department of Health has been in breach of decisions of the European court and the Supreme Court in this country. I mentioned that the Milliman report has shown that many of VHI's problems are generated internally by subjecting people to excessive hospitalisation. The report says that a VHI customer getting a medical implant will be admitted to hospital as an inpatient for 10.6 days, on average, and suggests the correct figure should be 3.7 days. Equally, it points out that VHI pays out for 7.5 days, on average rather than 3.7 days, in the case of a surgical inpatient admission. When we asked about the report, the Cathaoirleach clarified that an unredacted version of the Milliman report should have been distributed to those Senators who attended the debate in question. I suggest that the 40% increase would probably not have been necessary if there had been a full debate on the Milliman report. That is a serious point. It is important that the report be circulated because it makes a serious criticism to the effect that VHI causes many of its own problems. It contradicts VHI's cherished belief that its problems are caused by other companies going out and deliberately recruiting younger people. There is no evidence that health insurers have refused to recruit older people. Serious issues of efficiency in the health service are raised by the Milliman report. I thought we concluded last month's debate with the understanding that the Minister would circulate the report to enable it to be debated here. The prospect of throwing good money after bad, as part of a policy that is designed to protect VHI from competition rather than to deal with older people, arises in this context.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.