Tuesday afternoon was a sudden crisis in the Hague. Totally unexpected. How did this so? And what is it exactly about? Six questions. And answers in simple language.
1. Thus, there was unrest in the coalition?
The Senate made Tuesday for unrest in the coalition against by the Health Care Act of Minister Edith Schippers (Health VVD) to vote. Her plan is to abolish the right to free choice of doctor.
Schippers defended its regulatory reforms Tuesday in the Senate. That had to do it because the coalition of VVD and PvdA in the Senate does not have a majority (in parliament though). To draft legislation or adopted to get into the Senate, VVD and PvdA get support from three opposition parties:. D66, Christian Union and SGP
The law of Schippers was voted by a small majority: 38 voted against the proposal, 33 for. Of the 75 First there were 71 MPs present at the vote.
2. Who are the sleepers Not
opposition parties layers cross, but three Labour Party-ers: Adri Duivesteijn Marijke Linthorst and Guusje Ter Horst. They are afraid that the insurers’ get even more power “as the plan of Schippers continues.
3. What is the plan of Schippers exactly?
The bill Schippers was one of the pillars of the care agreement that was signed earlier this year.
Our current health care system works like this: buy health insurance care for the citizens and the citizens are required to have health insurance. In 2006, the fund was abolished and replaced by the present system whereby insurers take over the caring of public
There are now two types of policies:. The reimbursement policy and the kind policy. When the refund policy the insured chooses which doctor he goes and then submits the bill to the insurer. In-kind policy the insurer chooses the doctor.
If you have a kind policy, you still can go to a doctor who is not selected by your insurer. Article 13 of the Health Care Act determines the remuneration of the obtained medical attention. Because if you go to a doctor who has a contract with your insurer, you still entitled to a fee (sometimes entirely, sometimes partially, usually 70 to 80 percent).
The law requires that insurers do not having to pay the full amount, but not so much that the patient is an “obstacle” to go to a doctor of their choice. And now wants Minister Schippers abolish this duty of the insurers.
4. What doctors and health insurers plan Schippers?
Medici are furious about the amendment of Article 13. They call it a coupe of the insurers and the end of a fair distribution of care. But what they most of all at heart is that the fundamental right to choose your own doctor disappears.
Proponents of the amendment preach the flood if nothing happens; spending get out of hand, bad addiction clinics can quietly at the expense of the community continue to go about their business and care premiums remain unnecessarily high. Politicians must give insurers the tools to acquire more selective and critical care and as the medical force to account better for the quality delivered.
5. Why Health Care Insurance Act provides that such a crisis in the Hague?
order to curb expenditure in the care, Schippers worked for two years on her plan. The parties did not that again undress the basic package or increase the deductible and insurers argued for the change of Article 13, because they expected to save time costs.
Schippers said she is willing to talk about additional guarantees to offer opponents “comfort”, but the core of the law must remain intact: the free choice of doctor is partially restricted for health insurance customers. She is concerned about the principle: in the coalition, with the medical sector and constructive opposition was a choice made for the free choice of doctor, and not for the undressing of the basic package or increasing the deductible.
Schippers party (VVD) takes the negative vote of three Labour senators high. Immediately after the vote in the Senate led coalition summit in the Turret, the work of Prime Minister Mark Rutte (VVD). From the words of Rutte in the night from Tuesday to Wednesday showed how high the VVD shooting it:
“Today, something is very wrong.”
6. How is it going on?
Since Tuesday’s summit. First because three MPs from the Labour Party voted against, the VVD believes that the crisis on the Health Care Act in the first place is a Labour issue. And that the party must come up with a solution.
The coalition came together yesterday at the Ministry of Social Affairs, the Ministry of deputy prime minister Lodewijk Asscher (PvdA). Minister Schippers was with it, but left the call again after an hour. The Remains of the Day said the Labour Summit (Asscher, party leader Diederik Samson and party chairman Hans Spekman) with the rebellious trio from the Senate. Last night did the government parties have to reach an agreement, but there was made progress, said the parties tonight.
Deputy Prime Lodewijk Asscher (PvdA) reiterates this morning with Senator Adri Duivesteijn. Guusje ter Horst and Marijke Linthorst would be willing to conclude a compromise but let their decisions depend on Duivesteijn party member.
The VVD has no formal deadline set for the Labour Party, but is expected to follow a solution today because today is the last Kamerdag for the Christmas recess
Update 12:02 pm. Minister Lodewijk Asscher and Diederik Samson are now consulting the Turret
<. em> Also read the article in nrc.next “How the last crisis in The Hague could arise (€)
and the article in NRC Handelsblad for a detailed explanation. the Health Care Act and the opinions vane supporters and opponents, “the insurer Seize power? 6 theses on the free choice of doctor (€).
No comments:
Post a Comment