Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-11-15-Speech-3-146"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001115.6.3-146"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, a while ago, I received a serious meniscus injury. I turned to the health service and was told that I had to wait three weeks for an examination and then at least a further month for a crucial operation. I said, 'I can hardly walk! I need help straight away. Can I not be admitted as an emergency patient?' I received the answer, 'Everyone in the queue is an emergency case'.
It then appeared that there was in fact a way of getting in. I was suddenly informed that, if I had private health insurance or if I could pay the whole cost myself, then I could be examined immediately and be treated by the same doctor I should otherwise be forced to wait two months to be treated by. I am rather ashamed to admit it, but I chose that solution. I was operated on immediately, and that is why I am able to be here today. Otherwise, I should have been at home with my leg in plaster.
It nonetheless leaves a bad taste in the mouth, because each time a private patient jumps the queue, as I did, other people have to wait longer with their problems. It is, of course, the same doctor, the same nurses, the same hospitals and the same resources in the health care sector which are to be used, irrespective of whether it is ordinary or private patients who are being treated. This means that the bigger the health insurance sector becomes, the fewer resources there are left for general health care.
I think it is completely wrong that it should be money which decides who goes to the front of the queue. If we acquire an extended system of supplementary insurance for those who can pay, or who have employers who can pay, then we get what the report talks about, namely a distinction between basic care for 'ordinary people' and high-quality care for those who can pay.
My group believes that this class-determined type of organisation must be objected to. We want to see common arrangements which are based on the principle of solidarity and are the same for everyone. It is, of course, good that, as Mr Rocard proposes, the attempt should be made to supervise existing schemes, but what is most important of all is that private systems should not be allowed to expand at the expense of public systems."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples