triskellian | Prescriptions and politics and sentient computers

I think my computer may be becoming sentient. Looking at the BBC News home page just now, I noticed this link: Lib Dems' prescriptions pledge, which naturally interested me after last week's ranting. Clearly it interested my computer as well, since it was a visited link. My computer is worrying about me! Isn't that sweet?

Anyway. The BBC article says that the Lib Dems are proposing* to increase the numbers of chronic illnesses which attract free prescriptions, although it doesn't say whether asthma is included. The press release on the Lib Dems' website does include asthma, but it also says that the government makes a profit on inhalers for asthmatics. Which is a phrase that makes me furious just to read it.

*The BBC implies that 'proposing' means they're making it part of their election manifesto, whereas the Lib Dem website says they're presenting a bill. My understanding of the way these things work is horribly imperfect, but presumably the latter implies a far greater chance of it actually happening?

ETA:

onebyone points out that the Lib Dem press release I found is over two years old. D'oh.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

A Private Members' Bill does indeed stand more chance of actually happening, although there have been examples of Bills being voted for but not being passed because of a lack of MPs voting.

Of course, it's entirely possible for the thing to be both a PMB and a manifesto pledge.

Ten Minute Rule bills never pass, they're intended for MPs to be able to formally bring a subject up for discussion, as a kind of statement of intent.

The reason they're called Ten Minute Rule bills is that 10 minutes is how long the proposer is allowed to speak before the vote.

I've also just noticed that the press release to which you link is dated June 2002.

Damn. Didn't notice that. Wonder where the BBC's current info comes from then? <goes to look>

At a guess, this means that the Lib Dems have reannounced a two-year old policy? Not unusual..

Move to Wales? We put prescriptions back down to a fiver a little while back.
There was something on (I think) Moneybox this weekend about buying a prescription season ticket, and I thought of you - maybe there's something on the BBC website about it?

A tax on the sick.

Worst of all, it isn't even an administration cover charge for the NHS; the tax isn't 'hypothecated' to a specific account like NI, it's just notionally dedicated to the NHS. Yeah right, like Road Fund Tax. Doctors see nothing of the tax - many will advise you not to take up their prescription as a 'free at the point of use' NHS benefit if the generic drug is can be bought over-the-counter cheaper than the prescription charge - and Pharmacists see nothing of it either, despite being the point-of-payment for an unpopular tax and doing all the admin work.

So how come the NHS perceives itself to be financially dependent on it?

Gordon Brown would lose absolutely nothing if he raised the general rate of taxation to exactly cover prescription charge income. It's not like Labour introduced it, and it's not like anyone actually approves of taxing the sick. He's even release the money wasted on administering the damn' thing: how's that for stealing the opposition's thunder on efficiency savings?

And, FWIW you knowing, my consultancy fees are taxed at an effective rate of 56%. I get to keep less than half the money I earn; VAT, employer's NI, Employee's NI, income tax sliding down the bands to zero at the single person's tax allowance. Then I get to pay all the little taxes on travel and luxury goods: just as well I don't run a car! Or pay prescription charges, this month. Want to do the calculations, work out how much I actually have to earn to pay for a packet of antihistamines? Or how much you pay, for that matter. And I don't give a toss about the opinions of non-taxpayers when they talk about fiscal policy: it's none of their damned business.

But it's still immoral to tax the sick. The NHS is a collective endeavour and we pay when we are healthy.

Bear in mind though that something like 86% of prescriptions are free. The only people who pay for them are those who are well enough to work and wealthy enough to afford it.

So "a tax on the sick" is not quite fair -- it's more "a tax on the generally OK who are occasionally poorly".

I agree with you that it should be covered by general taxation in the same way most other NHS-related expenditure is, but let's keep it in perspective -- the vast majority of people who need prescriptions do not have to pay anything for them.

a tax on the generally OK who are occasionally poorly

Although we lately been discussing chronic illness, where the term "a tax on the sick" is entirely appropriate.

The only people who pay for them are those who are well enough to work and wealthy enough to afford it.

That is to say, those whose income tax and NI is funding the NHS, but who are being asked to pay more than others with the same income but who are not ill. The argument here is that "free at the point of use" is a myth.

I accept this argument entirely -- as I said above: "it should be covered by general taxation in the same way most other NHS-related expenditure is"

I added "let's keep it in perspective -- the vast majority of people who need prescriptions do not have to pay anything for them" because, frustrating and inequitable though it is that we and our wage-earning friends have to pay for prescriptions on top of our tax, there are plenty of harsher injustices out there affecting people worse off than us. For me, this falls into the middle-class peeve category, rather than something to take to the streets about.

I see what you mean. The context is, though, that triskellian's on a rant, and as such the importance is greatly increased.

For me, this falls into the middle-class peeve category

I think it's pushing it a little bit to say that anyone who has to pay for prescriptions is middle class, but point taken.

The context is, though, that triskellian's on a rant, and as such the importance is greatly increased.
Ooh, really? Stuff I rant about becomes more important? Cool. I'm sure I should be able to abuse this somehow ;-)

Prescriptions and politics and sentient computers

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Prescription and proscription

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject