N.Z. DOCTORS’ FEES REGULATED ANEW UNDER SOCIAL SECURITY

Grey River Argus, 14 October 1949, Page 7

N.Z. DOCTORS’ FEES REGULATED ANEW UNDER SOCIAL SECURITY

P.A. WELLINGTON, October 13. Doctors are to be prohibited from practising under a capitation system and a fee-for-service system at the same time.

This is provided for in a clause in the Social Security Amendment Bill, which was introduced and read the first time in the House of Representatives to-day. The Bill is divided in three parts. Part three gives effect to the recommendations of the Medical Services Committee for the removal of abuses from the social security medical services scheme. The refund system, which entitled a medical practitioner to recover fees from a patient, and entitled a patient to obtain a refund from the Social Security Fund, is not to apply, unless specially authorised. Fees may be recovered from a patient if the medical practitioner is authorised t< do so by the Council of the New Zealand Branch of the British Medical Association, after consultation, by the Council, with the Minister of Health. The fees payable from the Social Security Fund for general medical services are fixed at “a reasonable fee, not exceeding seven shillings and sixpence”. The existing law provides for the payment of a fixed fee of “seven shillings and sixpence” for such services.

Power is contained in the Bill for the payment of higher mileage fees that are at present allowed. The basic mileage fee is at present Is 3d a mile.

Regulations may be made to provide for specialist medical services and for a scale of fees for such services. Such regulations may include provisions for the official recognition of medical practitioners in any branch of medicine or surgery, and for the determination of disputes as to whether or not a particular service is a specialist medical service. Medical practitioners, or their personal representatives or assignees, are authorised by the Bill to recover fees from patients at law for general medical services under the Social Security Act, but not until one month after an account, signed by the doctor and showing the particulars of services provided, has been delivered to the person concerned. A Judge or a Magistrate may authorise an action to be taken earlier if there is reasonable cause to believe that the person owing the account is about to leave New Zealand, or is about to do any other act that would tend to prevent or to delay the doctor from obtaining payment. The patient may, within one month after delivery of th e account, apply to the Divisional Disciplinary Committee for an examination of the account, and for its opinion as to what are the reasonable fees for the services for which the account is rendered. The Court may, on its own motion, or on the application of any party, also refer an account to a Divisional Disciplinary Committee for its opinion. In any such case, the Court shall not complete the hearing of an action until it has the opinion of the Committee. The Cpurt shall not give judgment for any amount exceeding that which is considered by the Committee to be reasonable, without first affording the Committee a reasonable opportunity of appearing, by counsel, and giving evidence.

Sections in Part HI of the Bill are to come into force on a date fixed by the Minister of Health. They shall apply to the medical services provided by medical practitioners after the commencement of the legislation, but shall not apply to any provided before that date.

Part I of the Bill gives legislative effect to the increases in the social security benefits announced in the budget. Part II contains several miscellaneous provisions relating to monetary benefits. The Social Security Commission may increase, up to £26 a year, the rates of benefits granted to the parents of deceased members of the forces, or the mercantile marine. The Leader of the Opposition, Mr S. G. Holland, asked if the Bill increased the allowable income of the age beneficiaries beyond £1 a week, in view of the fact that purchasing power of the pound had fallen so greatly. The Minister of Social Security, Hon. W. E. Parry, said the increases were basic increases, and not cost-of-living increases. The increases represented the natural development of the social security principle in accordance with the productivity of the country.