| The Comments |
countries from the EU that will not pay for EHIC treatments for their citizens basically because they cannot afford to pay
So I suppose it’s a bit like running a corner shop. Customers keep coming in and getting stuff on tick ‘’on the slate’’. Owner knows they are skint and will never pay, but just lets it go on forever. Could that lead to bankruptcy or is the shop funded by free taxpayers money?.
_______________________
NO SNIDE COMMENTS PLEASE. STICK TO THE THREAD SUBJECT.
1
Like
|
Windtalker, in practice the UK does not turn anyone who needs medical treatment away, as the standards of care the UK holds dear make NHS staff allow such treatment for all. There has in recent times (quite apart from the Brexit subject) been a beginning of change in the NHS where it has finally been realised people from the commonwealth countries with rights of entry similar to EU subjects (but worse health standards in their respective countries) but no NHS treatment rights , come here for free treatment and once treated return to where they come form.
Due to this perception and a small (as yet) change of opinion, in certain hospitals, some foreignors are now asked for insurance proof before treatment, just as in other EU countries. The exception to this is true emergency treatment, accidents or life threatning conditions where in that case they are treated immediately. In reality there are few hospitals enforcing this standard, but after Brexit i think this will change considerably.
0
Like
|
Elsie, The scenario as the UK government sees it is that there are so many EU citizens in the UK as there are UK immigrants abroad, that this is a two way street, that is we treat as many people in the UK as there are UK residents treated abroad on the EHIC system. I feel in practice we probably lose out on this basis, maybe it would be interesting to ask the office of statistics the true figures?
0
Like
|
So you are requesting that the UK spend millions on a complex administrative system that requires overstretched staff to further administer ( since EU migrants gain access for 3 months as default and families can accompany those allowed without any realistic brake mechanism in place to act as effective control) to cope with the irregular pattern of migration that should be dealt with AT SOURCE by the EU within their rules supposedly to act as balance FROM THE OUTSET?
1
Like
|
windtalker
Elsie if you read up on NHS claiming back cost from EU countries ,the UK government comes up against a brick wall of countries from the EU that will not pay for EHIC treatments for their citizens basically because they cannot afford to pay
Do you have a link for that or did you just make it up? Thing is, you say things like that and people believe it. The real reason was outlined by a senior NHS manager who said "The NHS fails to keep proper records of overseas visitors who come here from the EU, meaning it is impossible to know how many people come here and receive treatment."
You know that the NHS is very poor at actually making these claims. Now, I was a practice manager for 14 years and regularly came up against the system not being geared to claim any back. When I asked the local PCT, several times, for the procedure of claiming and registering the EHIC I was told there wasn't one. In fact, a couple of years ago the NHS said there would be no need for EU citizens to even show the EHIC when going to a GP but hospitals could claim for ongoing treatment.
There's the real reason, not the made up one you come up with. UK simply has no system, no training is given to receptionists and the vast majority don't even bother. GPS have openly said they are there to treat people, not to act as unpaid debt collectors. Unlike, for example, Spain which follows the rules and knows exactly how to claim this money back (and not just from the UK but all other EU countries).
1
Like
|
Windtalker - Mickyfinn define treatment out of the EHIC.
Please don't make abusive statements about my post.
I refer to the rules and treaties related to the issue of the EHIC which clearly state emergency treatment only. That's pretty clear even to an NHS professional . If the NHS choose to widen the scope of those rules that is a management matter within the NHS. Not any fault with the EU system.
Time and again the supporters of Brexit on here will never acknowledge the fault lines that caused the vote for Brexit are with the British government of all colours and their total inability to regulate either social welfare or immigration.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
1
Like
|
Mickeyfinn, how does the EU currently deal with irregular patterns of migration and are you content with this current system?
Why would Canada need to ensure that such reference for review and re-evaluation was made mention of in their CETA treaty, and why should the UK be denied equal reassurance and ability to control post Brexit?
1
Like
|
I am content and feel the whole eu migration issue has been blown out of all proportion
0
Like
|
Boboal like you l also worked for the NHS many years back my Daughter is a G grade nurse. She has Two degrees and a master's, all nurses must be educated to a minimum of degree level in their chosen subject. It is not the highly trained staff at fault is is the vast amount of people from all over the EU that are demanding treatment from a system that was put in place to served the population of the UK no matter how much money you put into the NHS it will not cope .....it will never be big enough to look after the health care of the whole of the EU block.
.......just type in ..... Spanish government will not pay for ehic card...... and then make your own mind up.
1
Like
|
ads -
The EU is dealing with irregular migration patterns. It depends how you define those words. Is it EU citizens coming to the UK to work and contribute to the economy, that’s one category which requires no action because it's conforming to agreed treaties. Then there are illegal economic migrants from the rest of the world and refugees fleeing persecution.
Or are you simply lumping them all together and saying PROBLEM?
Your word irregular suggests something wrong a failing. In fact EU migrants contributing to UK GDP is a very satisfactory outcome in my view and it should and must continue. Britain will simply have to adapt its policies on social cohesion after Brexit and spend more resources in improving it.
The European Agenda on Migration adopted by the Commission in May 2015 set out the need for a comprehensive approach to migration management. Since then, a number of measures have been introduced – including the adoption of two emergency schemes to relocate 160,000 people in clear need of international protection from the Member States most affected to other EU Member States, and the endorsement of the Commission Action Plan on Return.
On 23 September, the European Commission presented a set of priority actions to implement the European Agenda on Migration to be taken within the next six months. This included both short term actions to stabilise the current situation as well as longer term measures to establish a robust system that will bear the test of time.
The list of priority actions set out the key measures immediately required in terms of: (i) operational measures; (ii) budgetary support and (iii) implementation of EU law.
The list was endorsed by the informal meeting of Heads of State and Government of 23 September 2015 and again on 15 October 2015.
These measures now need to be swiftly and effectively implemented at all levels.
For a state of play of the commitments made at the Western Balkans Route Leaders' Meeting, see here.
Financial pledges
At the informal meeting of Heads of State and Government of 23 September, Member States recognised the need to deploy additional national funding. They repeated their commitment at the European Council on 15 October. The Commission has already proposed amendments to its 2015 and 2016 budgets, boosting the resources devoted to the refugee crisis by €1.7 billion. This means that the Commission will spend €9.2 billion in total on the refugee crisis in 2015 and 2016. Member States committed to deploying national funding to match. However, a large number of Member States still need to match EU funding for the UNHCR, World Food Programme and other relevant organisations (€500 million), the EU Regional Trust Fund for Syria (€500 million) and the Emergency Trust Fund for Africa (€1.8 billion).
Member States' financial pledges since 23 September 2015, € million
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-migration/press-material/docs/state_of_play_-_member_state_pledges_en.pdf
European Commission press release
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
0
Like
|
with all this concern to justify EU migrants to the UK, there is a comment that keeps ringing in my ears. That comment is the one made by a member of the Polish government (i dont remember his position, but it was quite high) when the Polish started coming to the UK in quantity. He stated that it could only be good for Poland as the UK was taking the dross (or similar wording) of his country. What a depressing opinion of migration, and the quality of his countrymen.
1
Like
|
Mickyfinn I am still waiting for you or your mate Perryower1 to define emergency Treatment on the EHIC card .
2
Like
|
"In fact EU migrants contributing to UK GDP is a very satisfactory outcome in my view and it should and must continue. Britain will simply have to adapt its policies on social cohesion after Brexit and spend more resources in improving it."
European immigrants to Britain cost the taxpayer £3 million a day last year, according to a new analysis.
MigrationWatch UK, which campaigns for tougher border controls, said the overall cost of immigration from Europe – including recent arrivals and those who have lived here many decades - was £1.2 billion last year.
The sum was calculated by deducting the cost of benefits and public services, such as the NHS, which were consumed by migrants from the amount of money they contributed to the Exchequer through tax.
1
Like
|
It would seem the NHS could have put in procedures, systems and staff over the decades to recoup costs of treatment and this would have been self funding. It would not have taken rocket science to do it. The systems are there on the shelf like Spain and all the other EU countries.
But ‘’if’’ it was and still is a case of other countries won’t or can’t pay up we are back to the corner shop scenario. Let all the non paying customers help themselves for free because we don’t want to ‘’fall out’’ with them, and anyway we have paying customers who will make up the deficit. Just don’t tell the paying customers and keep it all a secret and if it gets out blame the EU.
_______________________
NO SNIDE COMMENTS PLEASE. STICK TO THE THREAD SUBJECT.
1
Like
|
Elsietanner i agree with what you claim in principle, but if you analyse the reasons EU immigrants get away with non payment of treatment, it lies solely with the UK authority running medical care and entitlement to that care. The problem is that this responsibility is at the level of the point of treatment, and checking that the patient has entitlement to treatment. This checking needs to be carried out by NHS employees at the time medical care is requested, and is obviously a lack of training to check documentation with each individual patient. If you go to a Spanish hospital, for instance, the first question is if you have means to pay, not if you have an EHIC card or insurance. If you dont qualify in that hospital, they will direct you to a hospital that may be prepared to help you on a different basis. Why do UK NHS staff not do this also? it weeds out non entitlement and non payers at the first hurdle.
0
Like
|
Good post robertt8696 but I doubt you will ever get an answer to such a simple question. It will get ignored,
_______________________
NO SNIDE COMMENTS PLEASE. STICK TO THE THREAD SUBJECT.
1
Like
|
Doctors have said they will boycott attempts to introduce identification checks as part of government plans to combat “health tourism”.
Chris Wormald, the most senior official in the Department of Health, told MPs that he was looking at making hospitals check patients’ papers to find out whether they should be paying, a proposal he admitted was controversial.
It would mean that those trying to use health services in England, including British citizens, might have to prove their identity before having operations and undergoing tests in hospitals, but it would not cover care received at GP surgeries.
Doctors have reacted with fury to the plan, and have threatened not to implement it. Dr Simon Stallworthy described it as “disgusting”, saying it was not the role of the NHS to be “actively working to kick migrants out”.
“If migrants know that doctors and other healthcare professionals will actively liaise with the Home Office to deport them then they will avoid seeking healthcare. That’s hugely dangerous – especially in pregnant women, because without prompt early access to healthcare they stand a much higher risk of presenting as an emergency later on, potentially with much worse outcomes.”
1
Like
|
Amazing how many of those who voted to leave try and ensure everyone that migration had nothing to do with their voting but every conversation, social media etc gets around to migration.
Jarvi
MigrationWatch UK, which campaigns for tougher border controls, said the overall cost of immigration from Europe – including recent arrivals and those who have lived here many decades - was £1.2 billion last year.
Does Migration Watch (hardly a neutral observer) say how it came up with those figures? The government have repeated, over and over, that the information is not available which beggars belief. However, both the Guardian and the New Statesman come up with figures at variance with those and claim that EU migration brings a net benefti to the UK of around £20 billion as does the University College of Leeds. However, I'm pretty sure they don't count the cost to the NHS and schooling in all that. Again, depends on which way your bias is leaning as to which figures you believe.
and windtalker, nothing I've read states that EU countries don't pay the UK when the bill comes in. The only ones about Spain and the EHIC is that some hospitals have refused to take them in Spain and make people use their travel insurance. And which organisation is fining Spain and taking them to court for doing that? Oh, yeah, the nasty old EU.
So now, not only do we blame the EU for the UK shortcomings in their system but now we are blaming the EU for Spain's faults as well.
And who actually costs the NHS more? Is it the EU citizens? No, according to Jarvi's preferred reading material, Migration Watch, it is non-EU citizens that cost the most. Of course, the expats living in Europe who go back to see their GP or collect their free prescriptions will also be a burden.
But we really are going round and round, aren't we. To paraphrase, it's like deja vu all over again.
0
Like
|
So it’s UK doctors morals (irrespective of their origin) above UK tax payers. But only applies in the UK not the rest of the world.
_______________________
NO SNIDE COMMENTS PLEASE. STICK TO THE THREAD SUBJECT.
0
Like
|
Sounds like a load of BS and whitewash, when were doctors ever the first point of contact.
_______________________
NARCISSISTIC PERSONALITY DISORDER: A mental disorder in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for admiration and a lack of empathy for others.
1
Like
|