Means test on UK treatment ‘not fair’
Tuesday 3rd February 2009, 2:59PM GMT.
PATIENTS are being made to prove how much they earn before they are offered travel to UK for specialist treatment.
People are having to share sensitive income tax details with the travel department at the General Hospital so that they can be means-tested.
Health Minister Jim Perchard was due to be questioned in the States this morning about the issue by Deputy Paul Le Claire, who wants to know why patients are being put through such a scheme.
Deputy Le Claire (pictured) said that he had been approached recently by a number of patients who had been asked by staff at the travel department at the General Hospital for income tax or other details showing that they were eligible for free travel to a UK hospital.
Read the full story in the Jersey Evening Post. Click here for subscription details. Individual editions are also available online.
The Queen's Diamond Jubilee
JEP Jubilee Editions
Saturday 2 June: Guide to Celebrations
Wednesday 6 June: Souvenir of Events
View The Queen in Jersey supplement
Travel
To, from and around the Island
Airport Arrivals/Departures
Harbours Arrivals/Departures
Bus Information/Timetables
This is Jersey
Jersey Evening Post
Useful links
I agree with your readers about means testing for uk flights for treatment. It is humiliating to have to supply income tax returns and this is meant to be private. You are sat at a desk with other people all around you listening to all you say.
It is bad enough knowing that you have to go away for treatment that our wonderful Hospital does not have the expertise to deal with, it is frightening and a traumatic experience being away from friends and family having to find your own way to a hospital in the u.k. specially if you are ill as you are if you are being sent away. I found the whole experience traumatic exhausting and frightening.
Report abuse
I too fit into this category and as a divorced mum of two, paying tax and working full time just to keep my head above water this does not bode well, especially when i read about the vast
amounts of money handed out to people who have somehow blagged their way into the income support scheme.
I recently flew my with my young child for a hospital check up in Southampton and as she was taken ill on the way back, Flybe charged me £156.00 to take an earlier flight or wait for 5 hours for the flight we were booked on, i think the whole thing needs addressing.
Incidently after writing a letter of complaint to Flybe i receved their usual stock standard answer regarding flight changes and policies !
Report abuse
This is a scandal. We are supposed to have a ‘free’ health service. I would like to know who has decided that it should now become a means tested service? The problem is where do they stop. Everytime they are looking for funds they could decide to means test you. This has got to be sorted out quickly.
Report abuse
Despicable!! If Jersey cannot provide the necessary treatment and want to send you to the UK or wherever else for treatment then they should foot the travel costs.
Report abuse
I disagree, I think people should be made to prove their income before tax payers money is handed out for flights. It is only fair. They could be a millionaire for crying out loud.
Report abuse
And the States members get free parking.
Report abuse
With the current uncertainty about the safety of systems at the Jersey General Hospital, it’s all the more reason to be able to easily access services off island.
I was particularly unimpressed by Senator Perchard’s answers to the supplementary questions about the threshold criteria for eligibility for transport allowances. He seemed capable only of reading the pre written script provided by his civil servants, unable to think on his feet and extrapolate specific details from the information in front of him.
Health is an extremely complex area and needs a sharp mind to understand and follow what is going on. I’m not sure Senator Perchard measures up to the necessary qualities required if today’s performance is anything to go by.
Report abuse
I have kidney failure and was told that I could not be placed on the transplant list unless I attended a training course at Guys hospital. The travel department at the hospital told me they could book the flight for me but that as I exceeded the income threshold, I would have to pay for it.
My wife who is from London and knows the transport system accompanied me at a total cost of around £400, taxis and trains included. Admittedly I chose for her to come also but it took the strain out of travelling in London. In fact the course consisted of 3 hours spent in a small cramped room with a parade of doctors telling me what I already knew. I see no reason why this couldn’t have been filmed on a DVD for distribution saving me and our health service money in future.
I question why I would be denied a life saving treatment if I refused to attend the course however that is another issue. Apparently as we had a joint income above the £52,000 threshold we did not qualify for free travel. Whilst this may seem a lot of money to some we have a mortgage to pay and do not consider ourselves wealthy. Furthermore if I am sucessful in recieving a transplant I will have to travel to Guys hospital once a week for the first 12 weeks and then every other week for 12 weeks for blood tests that apparently can’t be done in Jersey?
This means that I will have to pay for 24 return flights and trains myself post transplant at a time when I will be unable to work, my work sick entitlement only lasts for a month, thereafter I will be on state sick pay. I did write to health minister Ben Shenton who was gracious enough to respond but he cited the standard reply that there has to be a cut off point and individual cases cannot be addressed.
Is the number of people attending hospitals in the UK so great that this cost cannot be covered, after all the more money you earn the more social security and tax you pay. Ironic isn’t it that those that have paid the most into the system are not entitled to beneift from it in their hour of need.
Report abuse
It’s just the same as not letting UK residents take up Jersey Jobs and Houses. How unfair! The bottom line is, if you live in Jersey you can afford to pay for you own medical treatment and if you can’t then prove it and you will get help. What is more important your health or disclosure of Tax returns?
Report abuse
If you need a handout, prove it.
In these days of having to watch government spending I am glad the travel dept at the GH is only subsidising the needy and not the wanting
Report abuse
The health service would have more money if it was not providing expensive treatment for people from all over the world as written up in the JEP before Xmas.
Stop this abuse and perhaps you would not need to means test locals
Report abuse
if the States of Jersey cannot provide the correct level of care, expertise or equipment locally then it should be the States responsibility to get the person requiring treatment to a place where it can be provided.if not WHY are we paying Income Tax for. If you are paying tax on 10k a year or 100k ayear the tax is there to cover health etc. i will be happy to take a percentage of my tax out of the states each year and put it towards private Insurance if the States cannot provide the service that I am already paying for in my TAx
come on you so called Ministers stop attacking the public and get some of the civil servants and chief officers are making these decisions and turf them out soon we will have enough money in the kitty to cover all the flights needed
Report abuse
The basis of social policy in the UK is that need comes before means.Means testing in the case of those whom cannot get treatment in Jersey and have to travel to England, is morally wrong.All taxpayers should expect equal treatment when they are ill.
Report abuse
A) The States should exercise their special relationship with airlines to negotiate favourable rates.
B) We all pay social security and income tax based on our income. The higher the income, the more you pay. It is only reasonable to expect identical treatment regardless of your income – free for all!
Report abuse
Everyone pays tax according to their income level. Why should someone on a low tax threshold be allowed free transport when someone who is paying more not. Everyone should be entitled to the same level of care, regardless of whether that means travelling to the UK or not and regardless of their income. If this is not the case everyone should be taxed the same, as obviously paying more tax is then penalised when treatment is needed.
Report abuse
PJG good luck if you are the 1 of the 1 in 3 who suffer from cancer in a lifetime or if your hit by another major illness (unfortunately the odds are stacked that you will at some point). If the means test has nothing to do with your outgoings and it doesn’t (its only based on income) you could lose your home. But that’s ok you’ve only been contributing to the system all your working life why should you be entitiled to help at a worrying time like this. What you want a roof over your children’s heads – totally unreasonable. Surely more burden upon you while suffering a critical illness will be just what you need. Its always ok while its some else who suffers.
Report abuse
This comment is to all, but mainly to Keith (comment 8?)
I am the Chairman of the Jersey Kidney Patients Association and our title says it all. I totally 100% agree with what you have said Keith. The Hospital management have no idea when it comes to the travel you will require if you have the transplant at Guys. All I can say is that the JKPA are there for you and your family. Contact us on our help line 651555 or contact us via your Link Nurse on the Renal Unit, we can help with your travel.
To the Island as a whole, why do we allow our States to use charity to bail them out when they can’t manage their budgets properly!! Sack a couple of Senior H&SS managers and that’ll give you a travel budget for the year!!
Report abuse
JKPA Chairman, thanks for your support. I just want to clarify something before it is taken out of context. I take no issue with the doctors and nurses on the renal unit who are fantastic, the insistance on attending the course comes from Guys in the UK.Re the travel policy, this is government issued and the travel dept are only administering company policy.
Elaine makes a good point, it only takes into consideration the gross joint income and not any outgoings. This means that you might be on a joint income of £52,500 as in fact we are and not qualify yet you may have a mortgage leaving you with very little disposable income.
Conversely you might fall just below the threshold and live rent free and have a huge amount of disposable income. For what it’s worth my personal view is that it should be free for all who have paid into the system, how can those who have paid more be entitled to less?
Report abuse
Keith’s concise comments bring stark reality into this morally corrupt situation of “means before need” testing. Senator Perchard should take some advice from the Society of Actuaries in London, whom are charged to draft laws and enact social policy in the UK, before justifying the present system of discriminating against those whom contribute their fair share of taxes for a health service,which should treat all those with need, equally.
Report abuse
if all charities, withdrew their, free of charge services, what a mess the ill and infirm would be in, the states have benefited hugely from the goodwill of the people who give their time and support to many.
comment 18, has hit the nail on the head.
Report abuse
Elian
please read my post again
I have no problem with assistance being given to those that “need it”. in fact I want these people to be targeted. I just do not want our tax pounds to be spent on those that can afford their own travel,even if it does mean they have to give up some luxury or other.
I want our taxes to be spent wisely not emotionally, and sorry that means means testing even if the test is changed from how it is now.
There is not a bottomless pit of taxpayers money to pay for things of this kind. I would much rather we spent our tax pound on saving lives rather than lifestyles.
Report abuse
PJG – those that can afford their own travel are those who have paid a higher amount of tax and social security, surely they are entitled to benefit when they find themselves facing a critical illness.
Or do we just take money from them and deny them the assistance they have paid for which more than covers themselves as well as others. Why not charge them more for electricity as well but cut off their supply.
If you manage to go through this life without the threat of serious illnes to yourself or those you love you are fortunate, the odds are stacked against you.
Report abuse
Jersey and its council of ministers should remember that effectively it is no more than a borough council in a very small town in middle England.The difference though, is starkly apparent in the proportion of tax payers contributions regarding the financial remuneration of its so called ministers,senators and deputies,some of whom are beginning to style themselves as MP’s with constituents. If they are to consider themslves worthy of that role,they should realize that social justice extends beyond “means before need” for all whom contribute tax,even those whom pay more, without means tested discrimination for what should be a health service, open to all.
Report abuse
The most bizarre aspect of this is that in the country districts a Constable and Deputy are paid £85,000 a year between them to represent the interests of less than a thousand people and the States sit for only a tiny fraction of the time that the House of Commons sits for.
An MP receives a roughly comparable salary to a Member of the Jersey States and a lot more in allowances but represents roughly 55,000 people on average eg the electorate of the whole island!
Report abuse