HEALTH SCHEMES IN AUSTRALIA

Press, Volume LXXXV, Issue 25741, 1 March 1949, Page 5

HEALTH SCHEMES IN AUSTRALIA

FURTHER EFFORTS BY GOVERNMENT DOCTORS’ REFUSAL TO CO-OPERATE (From C. R. MENTIPLAY, Special Correspondent of the N.Z.P.A.) SYDNEY, February 28. Faced with the refusal of the British Medical Association to co-operate in either the Hee medicine or the national health scheme, the Australian Government is believed to be contemplating new measures designed to ensure the functioning of both systems. In this decision, the Government reveals its concern at the possible reactions of the people, who are paying Is Cd in the pound as a social services contribution, apart from income tax.

The free medicine scheme has been in operation for some time, but only a few doctors have shown themselves prepared to use it. Trying to avoid alleged pitfalls in the New Zealand scheme, the Australian Government approved a system in which prescriptions must follow an approved formulary and must be entered on a special form in order to qualify for benefits. The doctors have refused to use the form or to confine their prescriptions to the formulary. At a conference of the Legion of Ex-Servicemen in Perth a motion was tabled that the Commonwealth Government be urged to get the pharmaceutical benefits scheme working by arrangement with the doctors, or els® to drop the social service contribution. The proposal was ruled out on the ground that it was political, out its appearance was an indication that people are beginning to ask why they should pay both their chemist’s bill and the contributions collected by the Government to defraj' that bill. The Pharmaceutical Benefits Fund was expected to cost £2,000.000 this financial year, but in eight months the actual cost has been £28,000.

The national health plan is expected to cost £10,000,000 in a full year, but judging by the attitude of the doctors the actual payments will be small. The people have been paying the social service contribution for nearly three yegrs, and the Welfare Fund is now £74,000.000 in credit. Political correspondents believe that the Minister of Health (Senator N. E. McKenna) lost much prestige with his party and the people when in Hie House of Representatives last week he threatened the doctors with legal proceedings' if they did not co-operate. It is suggested that this was merely an attempt to promote further discussion after qther suggestions—including the training of young doctors, the importation of foreign, doctors, and the launching of a propaganda campaign against the British Medical Associa-tion-had failed to fill the bill.

A considerable section of the Labour caucus is believed to be averse to starting a direct fight with the doctors, particularly because when he introduced the Pharmaceutical Benefits Bill in 1947 Senator McKenna said: "Thera will be no compulsion of medical practitioners or pharmaceutical chemists to take part in the scheme.”

.Now another alternative Is being tried. The Government, which by Senator McKenna’s words slammed the door in the face of further negotiation, has now invited the British Medical Association to nominate three doctors to help to revise and enlarge the disputed formulary. Correspondents consider that this means the end of the attempt to use legal force.