From Trevor Copp.
I HAVE followed the debate concerning the comparative costs of dentistry here and in the UK with some interest. Having worked as a dentist full time (providing free dentistry) for what is now Health and Social Services, for more than 30 years I feel able to comment.

I used the word ‘free’. Of course there is no such thing as a free lunch – it is paid for by the taxpayer. There was, and probably still is, a terrific waste of money in the provision of this service, in that during my career anything between ten and 12 per cent of patients failed to attend for an appointment.

Just think, if the service was costing the taxpayer £1 million to run, £100,000 was immediately destined for the skip. Worse than that, the work that wasn’t done at the failed appointments had to be done at a later date, thereby lengthening waiting lists and putting further financial strain on the service.

In the UK a dentist can be offered financial inducements and practice premises to move to an area. A dentist setting up in Jersey is faced with a massive financial outlay, and usually obstructions rather than assistance. It is unwise to compare the two jurisdictions; UK citizens are taxed at a much higher rate than here.
For the last seven years I have worked in a small way in the tourist industry, and one thing is as plain as a pikestaff. In the so-called ‘shoulder months’, which in reality covers everything except the UK schools’ summer holiday, a large proportion of our visitors are senior citizens from the UK. Talking to them the majority are happy with what the holiday cost, and would return. No hassle to get here, and a friendly welcome. Just imagine, the holiday decided on, the price agreed, and the UK travel agent then lets slip, ‘Oh, by the way, you now need medical insurance to travel to Jersey. As you are both seniors we can arrange this for about £300.’ Two more tourists lost.

As I said earlier, there is no such thing as a free lunch, which the citizens of Jersey now appear to have enjoyed in the form of reciprocal health agreements with the UK for some time.

It is time for the good Senator and his colleagues to regain the moral high ground; give the UK Health Department the £4 million we owe them, even if it means digging into the rainy day fund, thus giving them time to debate a workable alternative, both for visitors and local taxpayers alike.

Any further reduction in the number of visitors would affect far more people connected with tourism, than would be affected by a similar reduction in agriculture.
Liddington,
Poplar Avenue,
St Saviour.