GP co-payment would crush NSW emergency departments: report

Date
    October 8, 2014


John Robertson says the GP co-payment will "smash the health system".



EXCLUSIVE

An extra 500,000 people a year would choke NSW emergency departments at a cost of $80 million if the federal government proceeds with its GP co-payment, internal health department documents show.      :o

The analysis by NSW Health has been backed by doctors and health groups who say a $7 Medicare fee for GP visits would be a disaster for the state's health system, blowing out emergency department waiting times and hurting society's sickest and poorest.      :(

Scenarios prepared for the NSW government in May, obtained by NSW Labor, assumed a $6 co-payment, lower than the $7 fee later proposed by the federal government.

It found a potential increase in emergency department attendances "in the vicinity of 500,000", leading to increased costs of about $80 million a year.

There were 2.6 million presentations to NSW emergency departments in 2012-13; that figure would have jumped by 27 per cent under a $6 co-payment, the analysis found.

NSW Opposition Leader John Robertson said the figures showed the co-payment would "smash the health system" and hurt families.      :(

"Thousands of people will be forced to turn up in emergency departments to avoid paying the fee to their local GP," he said.

NSW opposition health spokesman Walt Secord said it was time the state government "stopped defending their federal counterparts and stood up to Tony Abbott and his GP tax".

Following the budget in May, NSW Premier Mike Baird expressed concern about the $7 payment to visit a GP, saying "if it leads to long queues in emergency departments, well, that's not something that's sustainable".

The co-payment is among a host of budget measures whose passage through the Senate has been delayed due to a lack of support from Labor, the Greens and the Palmer United Party. 

Prime Minister Tony Abbott has previously signalled a compromise deal could be offered to ease the burden on pensioners.

The government says $5 of the $7 co-payment will go towards establishing a $20 billion Medical Research Future Fund. Health Minister Peter Dutton has said the government will push through a smaller version of the fund if the GP co-payment fails.

Australian Medical Association Federal President Brian Owler said hospitals have worked hard to improve emergency department waiting times.

"Putting another 500,000 people into that system is going to mean all of those gains are going to be lost, and we are probably going to end up in a worse position than when we started," he said.

Dr Owler said the policy was "driven by a fiscal and economic outlook, there is no consideration of … the health care needs of the Australian community."

The Consumers Health Forum of Australia chief executive Adam Stankevicius said the findings "show what a disaster the co-payment would be for primary health care in Australia, pushing so many patients toward belated emergency treatment".      :(

NSW Health Minister Jillian Skinner said the "rudimentary scenarios" for a GP co-payment were developed after the National Commission of Audit proposed the measure.

Ms Skinner said she had written to Mr Dutton regarding the policy, but she did not detail what was said.

A spokesman for Mr Dutton said his government had given states the option of charging co-payments at emergency departments for GP-type presentations. Ms Skinner has previously ruled out that option.

"The simple facts are that Commonwealth spending on health is increasing each and every year. If action isn't taken Medicare will collapse under its own weight," Mr Dutton's spokesman said.

As Fairfax Media reported last month, federal government spending on health has grown at an average annual rate of 5.5 per cent over the past two decades, compared with 8.8 per cent growth for public order and safety, 23.5 per cent for communications, and 2 per cent for scientific research.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/gp-copayment-would-crush-nsw-emergency-departments-report-20141007-10rbih.html#ixzz3FUVnuUzT

Pathetic scare campaign. I cannot imagine a situation where anyone wouldn't be able to afford a visit to the GP just because of this co-payment. It's such a small amount and only for the first ten visits anyway. So if you're a regular visitor to your local GP, you won't pay it after your tenth visit. But even if you're not, most GPs bulk bill follow-up appointments. Pensioners won't have to pay it at all. This scare campaign is really quite appalling, as is the misinformation campaign associated with it.

Thank havens for the good people in the senate.  Mr Abbott, we don't want your doctor tax.  Mr Abbott we don't want your Co - Payment.      :(   

wrote on Oct 8^th, 2014 at 6:58am:

Thank havens for the good people in the senate.  Mr Abbott, we don't want your doctor tax.  Mr Abbott we don't want your Co - Payment.      :(

No! We don't want it. Leave Medicare alone Mr Abbott.

wrote on Oct 8^th, 2014 at 6:08am:

Thousands of people will be forced to turn up in emergency departments to avoid paying the fee to their local GP," he said

Just levy an equivalent fee on services at emergency departments and that will foil the freeloaders.

Link the medicare card to Centrelink and deduct the fee from their next Centrelink handout just like Centrepay...SIMPLE

Quote:

Thousands of people will be forced to turn up in emergency departments to avoid paying the fee to their local GP," he said

Yep, and likely spend $20 on a cab to get there to save $7... ::)

It would be a disaster for me. I've got good money resting on it not passing.

Swagman wrote on Oct 8^th, 2014 at 1:41pm:

Quote: Thousands of people will be forced to turn up in emergency departments to avoid paying the fee to their local GP," he said Yep, and likely spend $20 on a cab to get there to save $7... ::)

as opposed to the $25 cab fee to get to the docs?  :D :D

Armchair_Politician wrote on Oct 8^th, 2014 at 6:52am:

I cannot imagine a situation where anyone wouldn't be able to afford a visit to the GP just because of this co-payment

thats because you're not very bright .... but not to worry, there are many others out there that will do the thinking for you :D :D

John Smith wrote on Oct 8^th, 2014 at 2:04pm:

Swagman wrote on Oct 8th, 2014 at 1:41pm: Quote: Thousands of people will be forced to turn up in emergency departments to avoid paying the fee to their local GP," he said Yep, and likely spend $20 on a cab to get there to save $7... ::) as opposed to the $25 cab fee to get to the docs?  :D :D

It's about $50 odd from town to nearest hospital in a cab but the Medical Centre is in walking distance.  The pub is strategically positioned across the road too.  Schooies are $4.20.  So you could visit the GP, and then go and have 10 schooners for $50.


Armchair_Politician wrote on Oct 8^th, 2014 at 6:52am:

I cannot imagine a situation where anyone wouldn't be able to afford a visit to the GP just because of this co-payment

Take away the $300 blown on the pokies and it's not surprising

Swagman wrote on Oct 8^th, 2014 at 3:06pm:

So you could visit the GP, and then go and have 10 schooners for $50.

...or 11 without the co-payment.  :(

Armchair_Politician wrote on Oct 8^th, 2014 at 6:52am:

Pathetic scare campaign. I cannot imagine a situation where anyone wouldn't be able to afford a visit to the GP just because of this co-payment. It's such a small amount and only for the first ten visits anyway. So if you're a regular visitor to your local GP, you won't pay it after your tenth visit. But even if you're not, most GPs bulk bill follow-up appointments. Pensioners won't have to pay it at all. This scare campaign is really quite appalling, as is the misinformation campaign associated with it.

$7 is a lot of money if you don't have much.

Let's spread the pain a little more equally then. Make the co-payment equal to 3% of one's gross weekly income for every doctor's consultation.

Swagman wrote on Oct 8^th, 2014 at 3:06pm:

John Smith wrote on Oct 8th, 2014 at 2:04pm: Swagman wrote on Oct 8th, 2014 at 1:41pm: Quote: Thousands of people will be forced to turn up in emergency departments to avoid paying the fee to their local GP," he said Yep, and likely spend $20 on a cab to get there to save $7... ::) as opposed to the $25 cab fee to get to the docs?  :D :D It's about $50 odd from town to nearest hospital in a cab but the Medical Centre is in walking distance.  The pub is strategically positioned across the road too.  Schooies are $4.20.  So you could visit the GP, and then go and have 10 schooners for $50. Armchair_Politician wrote on Oct 8th, 2014 at 6:52am: I cannot imagine a situation where anyone wouldn't be able to afford a visit to the GP just because of this co-payment Take away the $300 blown on the pokies and it's not surprising

You may be surprised to hear this Swag, but not everyone in Australia lives in Dapto :D :D :D

By the way, bus fair to the Wollongong hospital is what? $10?   :D :D

Bam wrote on Oct 8^th, 2014 at 3:35pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Oct 8th, 2014 at 6:52am: Pathetic scare campaign. I cannot imagine a situation where anyone wouldn't be able to afford a visit to the GP just because of this co-payment. It's such a small amount and only for the first ten visits anyway. So if you're a regular visitor to your local GP, you won't pay it after your tenth visit. But even if you're not, most GPs bulk bill follow-up appointments. Pensioners won't have to pay it at all. This scare campaign is really quite appalling, as is the misinformation campaign associated with it. $7 is a lot of money if you don't have much. Let's spread the pain a little more equally then. Make the co-payment equal to 3% of one's gross weekly income for every doctor's consultation.

For those that don't pay net tax

Swagman wrote on Oct 8^th, 2014 at 3:39pm:

Bam wrote on Oct 8th, 2014 at 3:35pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Oct 8th, 2014 at 6:52am: Pathetic scare campaign. I cannot imagine a situation where anyone wouldn't be able to afford a visit to the GP just because of this co-payment. It's such a small amount and only for the first ten visits anyway. So if you're a regular visitor to your local GP, you won't pay it after your tenth visit. But even if you're not, most GPs bulk bill follow-up appointments. Pensioners won't have to pay it at all. This scare campaign is really quite appalling, as is the misinformation campaign associated with it. $7 is a lot of money if you don't have much. Let's spread the pain a little more equally then. Make the co-payment equal to 3% of one's gross weekly income for every doctor's consultation. For those that don't pay net tax

multinationals are on another thread, leave them out of this topic!

Armchair_Politician wrote on Oct 8^th, 2014 at 6:52am:

Pathetic scare campaign. I cannot imagine a situation where anyone wouldn't be able to afford a visit to the GP just because of this co-payment. It's such a small amount and only for the first ten visits anyway. So if you're a regular visitor to your local GP, you won't pay it after your tenth visit. But even if you're not, most GPs bulk bill follow-up appointments. Pensioners won't have to pay it at all. This scare campaign is really quite appalling, as is the misinformation campaign associated with it.

Yet apparently you could imagine all sorts of situations that would have children starving & people living in dumpsters for every Labor policy or amendment.
Something about pensioners freezing to death even though the government paid then more then they spent, etc

Curious :o

Bam wrote on Oct 8^th, 2014 at 3:35pm:

Let's spread the pain a little more equally then. Make the co-payment equal to 3% of one's gross weekly income for every doctor's consultation.

Yeah lets spread it around.

I paid for around 185 GP co-visits then last year just in medicare levy.

Another 204 with the PHI premiums

All for naught service.   :-?


John Smith wrote on Oct 8^th, 2014 at 3:38pm:

By the way, bus fair to the Wollongong hospital is what? $10

For a pensioner be about $3 bucks

It's still gunna cost $6 bucks plus numerous waiting hours at casualty dept.  :( Buy a cuppa or a coke and you've blown your $7 bucks. 

A dead set stuningly stupid argument.  People don't bat an eyelid to pay $6 for a ride on a bus or train or give a stuff about paying $2.50 to get their cash out of an ATM and $5 a month just to have a bank account  :o.... but baulk at the prospect of paying $7 for a GP consultation? The services of a highly educated professional.

 

so Swag, if they agree to the co-payment does that mean the bus ride  is free?

talk about dead set stupid arguments .... the co-payment is a new bill on top of any existing ... you pretending they'll somehow save by going to the GP instead of the hospital is ridiculous.

John Smith wrote on Oct 8^th, 2014 at 5:57pm:

so Swag, if they agree to the co-payment does that mean the bus ride  is free? talk about dead set stupid arguments .... the co-payment is a new bill on top of any existing ... you pretending they'll somehow save by going to the GP instead of the hospital is ridiculous.

Robbo's argument is that $7 to see a GP will see people flocking to Hosp Emergency centres to avoid the fee.  My argument is that the cost of getting there will be just as much if not more than the co-payment.  That's why it's a dopey argument.

Mr Abbott, we want the doctor that does the bulk billing.  We don't want your Co payment.      :(       

wrote on Oct 8^th, 2014 at 7:14pm:

Mr Abbott, we want the doctor that does the bulk billing.  We don't want your Co payment.      :(

Mr Abbott, we don't want your Government.  ;)

Bam wrote on Oct 8^th, 2014 at 7:49pm:

wrote on Oct 8th, 2014 at 7:14pm: Mr Abbott, we want the doctor that does the bulk billing.  We don't want your Co payment.      :(        Mr Abbott, we don't want your Government.  ;)

Yep they want to live out of everyone else's pocket Mr Abbott.

I know it's difficult to drill through double brick but you need to try and get through their thick skulls that Mr Rudd has already used up everyone else's money.  :D

Armchair_Politician wrote on Oct 8^th, 2014 at 6:52am:

Pathetic scare campaign. I cannot imagine a situation where anyone wouldn't be able to afford a visit to the GP just because of this co-payment. It's such a small amount and only for the first ten visits anyway. So if you're a regular visitor to your local GP, you won't pay it after your tenth visit. But even if you're not, most GPs bulk bill follow-up appointments. Pensioners won't have to pay it at all. This scare campaign is really quite appalling, as is the misinformation campaign associated with it.

most GPs bulk bill follow-up appointments

That's a new one - never heard of any doctor doing that.

Dnarever wrote on Oct 8^th, 2014 at 8:04pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Oct 8th, 2014 at 6:52am: Pathetic scare campaign. I cannot imagine a situation where anyone wouldn't be able to afford a visit to the GP just because of this co-payment. It's such a small amount and only for the first ten visits anyway. So if you're a regular visitor to your local GP, you won't pay it after your tenth visit. But even if you're not, most GPs bulk bill follow-up appointments. Pensioners won't have to pay it at all. This scare campaign is really quite appalling, as is the misinformation campaign associated with it. most GPs bulk bill follow-up appointments That's a new one - never heard of any doctor doing that.

That's a new one - never heard of anyone - never hearing of any doctor doing that?  :D ;D

Swagman wrote on Oct 8^th, 2014 at 6:47pm:

John Smith wrote on Oct 8th, 2014 at 5:57pm: so Swag, if they agree to the co-payment does that mean the bus ride  is free? talk about dead set stupid arguments .... the co-payment is a new bill on top of any existing ... you pretending they'll somehow save by going to the GP instead of the hospital is ridiculous. Robbo's argument is that $7 to see a GP will see people flocking to Hosp Emergency centres to avoid the fee.  My argument is that the cost of getting there will be just as much if not more than the co-payment.  That's why it's a dopey argument.

now that depends on where you live doesn't it ... back to my first point ... NOT EVERYONE LIVES IN DAPTO

It's bad policy.
GPs are the cheapest part of the health system and play the vital gate keeper role.
Hospitals and specialist care are hugely expensive.
And the value of preventative health , mainly done in general practice is that it saves expensive hospital care, if done correctly

aquascoot wrote on Oct 9^th, 2014 at 3:51am:

It's bad policy. GPs are the cheapest part of the health system and play the vital gate keeper role. Hospitals and specialist care are hugely expensive. And the value of preventative health , mainly done in general practice is that it saves expensive hospital care, if done correctly

"And that's all ah have ta say abaht the GP co-payment!"

Right on, Bro - that says it all....

GP tax to hit cancer patients      :(

Date
    October 8, 2014



Cancer and other chronic disease sufferers will be hit with significant advance costs for medical imaging and other pathology testing under the government's proposed $7 GP co-payment, according to evidence given to a parliamentary committee on Wednesday.      :(

The Australian Diagnostic Imaging Association has warned that previously undiscussed impacts of the fee mean people with the greatest need to get access to complex medical services will be the worst affected.

And many will remain worse off even after rebates are received.

The ADIA says a person suffering liver cancer will be hit with a fee of more than $1200 for scans, consultations and pathology and this figure will climb to more than $2200 if that cancer has metastasised, that is, spread beyond the liver.

In the first case, the cancer sufferer will be up to $264 worse off over a year and in the second case up to $678 worse off, according to the group's modelling.

It says the hike stems from decisions that abolish the bulk-billing incentive from July 1 next year, an aspect of the GP co-payment package, which will have rebates for X-rays, MRI, PET scans and ultrasounds reduced from 95 to 85 per cent for patients who were previously bulk-billed.

Opposition Leader Bill Shorten said the modelling showed why the proposed fee was unfair and would continued to be opposed by Labor and the crossbench senators.

"The full extent of the pain from Tony Abbott's GP tax goes way beyond the doctor's surgery, with experts revealing cancer patients will now be forced to fork out thousands of dollars upfront to pay for MRI, X-rays, CAT scans and mammograms," he said.      :(

He said it was a "hidden trap" that would "force many cancer patients to pay extraordinary fees upfront, even those on healthcare and pensioner concession cards".

"The trap exposes Tony Abbott's GP tax as not just a tax on visits to the doctor, it's also a pathology tax, a diagnostic imaging tax and an MRI tax.      :(

"That's because the impact of the GP tax is compounded by a 10-15 per cent cut in the rebate paid to radiologists, and the abolition of a safety net for high-cost diagnostic imaging services such as PET scans and nuclear medicine.

"According to the Australian Diagnostic Imaging Association, patients will be forced to pay $90 upfront for every X-ray, $380 for every CAT scan, up to $160 for every mammogram and $190 for every ultrasound. For those unfortunate enough to need a PET scan, the upfront cost could be as high as $1000."

Mr Shorten claimed that, even after Medicare rebates, patients would be paying an extra $160 for every scan.

The aim of the GP co-payment was to raise $1.2 billion, much of which would be used to nourish a medical research fund.

The government justified the measure on the principle of the need for a price signal on doctors' services, but the principle was never raised before the election.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/gp-tax-to-hit-cancer-patients-20141008-1136tj.html#ixzz3FaIbNCdN

Dnarever wrote on Oct 8^th, 2014 at 8:04pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Oct 8th, 2014 at 6:52am: Pathetic scare campaign. I cannot imagine a situation where anyone wouldn't be able to afford a visit to the GP just because of this co-payment. It's such a small amount and only for the first ten visits anyway. So if you're a regular visitor to your local GP, you won't pay it after your tenth visit. But even if you're not, most GPs bulk bill follow-up appointments. Pensioners won't have to pay it at all. This scare campaign is really quite appalling, as is the misinformation campaign associated with it. most GPs bulk bill follow-up appointments That's a new one - never heard of any doctor doing that.

My doctor has done it for me in the past and I've overheard other in the surgery getting the same. It's not uncommon.

Medicare bulk-billing rates are highest in Labor-held electorates

    The Australian
    October 09, 2014


LABOR holds the seats with the highest bulk-billing rates and Coalition MPs represent areas where patients are most accustomed to paying to see a doctor, according to Medicare figures that deliver a political headache for the Abbott government.      :-?

The political divide over controversial budget plans for a $7 GP co-payment is laid bare in figures released by the Health Department after a Freedom of Information request from The Australian.

Before the May budget, Joe Hockey made the case for a co-payment by declaring, repeatedly, that his electorate of North Sydney had “one of the highest bulk-billing rates in Australia (despite being) one of the wealthiest electorates in Australia’’.

“To me there is something wrong with that,’’ the Treasurer said at the time.

Under pressure from the opposition over the claims, Mr Hockey later tempered his comments to say only that the bulk-billing rate in North Sydney had been “quite high” but “is not high at the moment”.

While the department stopped publishing electorate bulk-billing figures some years ago, the figures obtained under FOI laws reveal North Sydney had a bulk-billing rate of 64.8 per cent in 2013-14 — the 10th-lowest and 28 percentage points below the top rate.

The electorate with the lowest bulk-billing rate overall was Curtin, in Perth’s western suburbs, held by Foreign Minister Julie Bishop, with 57.2 per cent. Nine of the 10 lowest rates were in electorates represented by Liberal or Liberal National Party MPs.

By contrast, nine of the 10 highest bulk-billing electorates were held by Labor, including that of opposition Treasury spokesman Chris Bowen, whose electorate of McMahon had a rate of 89.9 per cent. Labor is campaigning to “save Medicare”.

Tony Abbott’s electorate of Warringah, on Sydney’s northern beaches, had a bulk-billing rate of 60.9 per cent, making it one of the lowest, while Bill Shorten’s electorate of Maribyrnong, in Melbourne’s northwest, had a rate of 80.1 per cent.

Health Minister Peter Dutton’s electorate of Dickson, in Brisbane’s north, had a rate of 75.2 per cent, while opposition health spokesman Catherine King’s electorate of Ballarat had a rate of 75.4 per cent.

Under the budget proposal, the government would cut $5 from routine Medicare rebates and give doctors and other providers an incentive payment to charge patients $7 and pocket the difference. The savings would initial­ly be used to establish a $20 billion medical research futur­e fund and ultimately help the budget bottom line.

The figures support The Australian’s analysis in April that a co-payment would hit traditional Labor voters hardest and might ultimately shift costs to state-run public hospitals.

Labor yesterday seized on pre-budget modelling by NSW Health that showed under a $6 co-payment, as was initially floated, 500,000 patients would attend public hospital emergency departments instead of a GP.      :o

The budget suggested the states combat this by charging patients who attended emergency departments with GP-level complaints, however, the states have ruled out such a move.

The Opposition Leader expressed concern over evidence to a Senate inquiry that out-of-pocket costs for diagnostic imaging, most of which would attract the co-payment, would skyrocket as a result of changes to the rebate and safety nets.

“The GP tax is a disaster for health, and a disaster for the budget,’’ Mr Shorten said.      :(

Mr Dutton has rejected altern­ative proposals for the co-payment but has not given up hope of getting the measure through the Senate, where it faces defeat in its current form.

“The government is determined to strengthen Medicare and make it sustainable,’’ his spokesman said yesterday. “Discussions with the independent senators are continuing.”

Swagman wrote on Oct 8^th, 2014 at 3:06pm:

John Smith wrote on Oct 8th, 2014 at 2:04pm: Swagman wrote on Oct 8th, 2014 at 1:41pm: Quote: Thousands of people will be forced to turn up in emergency departments to avoid paying the fee to their local GP," he said Yep, and likely spend $20 on a cab to get there to save $7... ::) as opposed to the $25 cab fee to get to the docs?  :D :D It's about $50 odd from town to nearest hospital in a cab but the Medical Centre is in walking distance.  The pub is strategically positioned across the road too.  Schooies are $4.20.  So you could visit the GP, and then go and have 10 schooners for $50. Armchair_Politician wrote on Oct 8th, 2014 at 6:52am: I cannot imagine a situation where anyone wouldn't be able to afford a visit to the GP just because of this co-payment Take away the $300 blown on the pokies and it's not surprising

It's about $50 odd from town to nearest hospital in a cab but the Medical Centre is in walking distance


Not for the 80% of people who live closer to the hospital it's not.

Governing for all Australians apparently means penalising those with the lowest incomes ?

What A Disaster The GP Co-Payment Would Be

Only for the poor and the Hospitals.

The Bulk billing rates quoted look extraordinary - I have not found a bulk billing Doctor in 2 decades ?

I am not aware of one in my region ?

Do they count the ones who will bulk bill pensioners and such only ?

They seem to quote 50% as being poor and I would have expected about 20% to have been considered very good.

Like many others, I pay a fair hike each year in Medicare and Private Health Insurance.    Very rarely do I get bulk billed for anything!   The co-payment wouldn't bother me IF it was going back to the health system, not being used to build the "Arab Joe Centre of Medicine"

We have more than enough research centres as it is, use the copayment to assist them if you must, but don't duplicate resources

Armchair_Politician wrote on Oct 9^th, 2014 at 7:04am:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 8th, 2014 at 8:04pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Oct 8th, 2014 at 6:52am: Pathetic scare campaign. I cannot imagine a situation where anyone wouldn't be able to afford a visit to the GP just because of this co-payment. It's such a small amount and only for the first ten visits anyway. So if you're a regular visitor to your local GP, you won't pay it after your tenth visit. But even if you're not, most GPs bulk bill follow-up appointments. Pensioners won't have to pay it at all. This scare campaign is really quite appalling, as is the misinformation campaign associated with it. most GPs bulk bill follow-up appointments That's a new one - never heard of any doctor doing that. My doctor has done it for me in the past and I've overheard other in the surgery getting the same. It's not uncommon.

you seem to confuse a doctors regular fees with the co payment ....

co payments will be added onto every visit.  Your doctor can pay them himself and refuse to pass them onto you, but I don't see an awful lot of that happening

The Australian Medical Association (AMA) has unveiled its own plans for a GP co-payment and urged the Federal Government to adopt it, and ditch its own policy for a $7 co-payment.

AMA president Brian Owler says his organisation's plan is fair as vulnerable groups such as concession card holders are exempt.

"We propose a minimum $6.15 co-payment, which aligns with the current bulk billing incentive, that applies to all patients, but the Government will pay the co-payment for concession card holders and patients under 16 years of age," Associate Professor Owler said.

"The AMA co-payment model protects vulnerable patients in the community, values general practice to encourage quality care and support prevention and chronic disease management, and it also sends a price signal for non-concession patients."

The AMA put their proposal to the Government three weeks ago but heard nothing back from them.

"Under our model, there will be no cut to the Medicare patient rebate, and there is an incentive for general practices to collect the co-payment," Associate Professor Owler said.

"The AMA has long supported well-designed and well-intentioned co-payments, and that is what we are releasing today."

Under the AMA plan, there would be no co-payment on:

Residential aged care visits
Home visits
Chronic disease management services
Health assessments
Mental health treatment items
The AMA says plans to charge an extra $7 for blood tests and scans should be put on hold for at least two years.

"The AMA is not opposed to the principle that people with the means should contribute to the cost of their health care, but it has to be done in a way that is practical, values general practice, and protects disadvantaged patients," Associate Professor Owler said.

Health Minister Peter Dutton accused the AMA of a cash grab, saying their proposal benefitted doctors without addressing the Government's aim of arresting spiralling costs.

"The current proposal put forward by the AMA with regards to the $7 co-payment will result in a windfall for doctors while wiping out 97 per cent of the Government's estimated savings," he said.

"Take away the $300 blown on the pokies and it's not surprising"

You really have to laugh.  Let me know when you have an actual point on the subject.  It is a terrifying thought that IF your 'wife' is a school principal, you both likely share similar thinking patterns of non-thought.

Makes her ideally suited to the current focus on on-education.

Whatever happended to the if you don't hear from us everything is fine doctors follow up , now it's come in we need to get more of your money to tell you your iron levels are low.

Quote:

whatever happended to the if you don't hear from us everything is fine doctors follow up , now it's come in we need to get more of your money to tell you your iron levels are low.

Because, even at current levels, the medicare rebate is choking solo and duo practice out of business.  Remember, they are the ones that were older fashioned, family doctors that knows you by your first name.  And we are left with medium to large sized corporate practises who demand their bottom lines from doctors who had signed an contract with them. 

The medicare co payment is going to make it worse.

tickleandrose wrote on Oct 9^th, 2014 at 2:14pm:

Quote: whatever happended to the if you don't hear from us everything is fine doctors follow up , now it's come in we need to get more of your money to tell you your iron levels are low. Because, even at current levels, the medicare rebate is choking solo and duo practice out of business.  Remember, they are the ones that were older fashioned, family doctors that knows you by your first name.  And we are left with medium to large sized corporate practises who demand their bottom lines from doctors who had signed an contract with them.  The medicare co payment is going to make it worse.

I'd like to see how that is happening - how is it possible for someone on six patients an hour at $50 a pop to go broke?

Corporatisation and tax dodging again?  Seems that's the only way to get ahead in this country...

Let's hear it from Andrei again - NOBODY would enter a corporate regime or run a family trust unless it paid handsomely in tax concessions. ....NOBODY!

Looks like Joe is getting anew line on where to look for the lost taxes...

Don't forget that these kinds of 'privatised' corporation models also incur the added costs of all those 'ceo's' and 'board members' on nice little earners for doing nothing, thus adding to the cost.

Bring back the Local GP.... my doc quit working for the local hospital because they were hassling him constantly over payments for getting callouts in the middle of the night... .now they've got a new graduate I think... I won't go there.  Another doc I know was hassled relentlessly over payments for travel to do nursing home visits..

Yep - the aim of the game is to cut costs of doctors by squeezing them from both sides - always been on the cards with every government claiming doctors are paid too much and put their prices up every time the Medicare rebate goes up.

Soon we'll be left with the Taught whiz-kids on the block... I tremble...

The Australian Nursing Federation
State Governments warn Mr Abbott about GP fee

Friday 10th October, 2014.

The Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation (ANMF) has expressed its concerns about recent analysis from State Governments showing the impact that will be felt in their  public hospital emergency departments (EDs) if co-payments for basic medical services are introduced.      :(

Potentially, an additional 500,000 for NSW and 290,000 for South Australia ED presentations alone, according to the analysis.

ANMF Federal Secretary, Lee Thomas, said the reports from the Government Departments simply provided further evidence on the damage that will be caused by the Abbott Government’s proposed co-payments for GP visits and pathology and diagnostic tests, which health groups and experts have been warning of, ever since the Government’s Budget was first announced.

“Now, even State Governments and Health Departments are warning Mr Abbott about the dangerous impact of introducing co-payments,” Ms Thomas said today.

“The Abbott Government is claiming that co-payments are needed to send a price signal to consumers and control the budget but on top of the devastation they will cause to the health of the community, the co-payments simply make no economic sense.      :(

“As well as this recent modelling from the States, in its analysis of out-of pocket health costs, the Grattan Institute calculated how much a shift of patients from GPs to emergency departments would cost the Government.

“The Medicare rebate for the most common type of GP consultation, which lasts up to 20 minutes, is $36.30. The average cost of a non-admitted level 5 triage visit to a hospital – a likely substitute for a GP visit – is $290.

“Multiplied by 500,000 for NSW and 290,000 for SA, and we’re not sure yet how much for the other states, that’s a lot of money. And while it might look good for the Federal Government’s Budget by shifting the costs onto the States and Territories, it’s no saving and it’s no way to run the country.

“As a Federation of State and Territory branches with over 240,000 members, the ANMF understands that the way we achieve things is through cooperation and collaboration not cost shifting and blame shifting. But maybe that’s because, as nurses and midwives, we’re used to working together to get the best outcome for our patients, their families and the community.

“It’s time the Abbott Government did the same.”