National puts age limit on GP subsidy

Paul Hutchison

National says those aged between 25 and 65 will lose the $26 subsidy Labour will pay for doctors' visits, unless they are on low incomes.

The party outlined its policy to reverse Labour plans for universal subsidies for GP visits yesterday, but did not release details.

Under Labour attack over the move yesterday, health spokesman Paul Hutchison confirmed that the young and elderly would not be affected by the change.

Labour has yet to introduce the subsidies for the 25 to 65 group, but planned to do so by mid-2007.

National argues that the well-off should not be subsidised by scarce health dollars, but it transpires that it may not have picked the best argument to make its case.

On Wednesday, leader Don Brash said in his speech to doctors outlining the changes: "The question really, is this. Do Helen Clark and Don Brash, and indeed probably all of you in this audience, need a $26 subsidy each time you require the services of a GP?

"Does it make sense to give each of us a subsidy, when we can perfectly well afford the full price?"

But Dr Brash turns 65 just a week after the election, which means, unlike Helen Clark, he will in fact be eligible for the subsidies National will retain.

Dr Hutchison dismissed the issue last night, saying any politician's name could have replaced Dr Brash's in the speech.

Asked whether it undermined the argument that only those on low incomes should get subsidies, he said a line had to be drawn somewhere. A similar line was drawn for superannuation eligibility, which was universal over the age of 65.

Labour is passionate about universal GP visit subsidies - which would halve the average $50 cost of a consultation - but its entire Working For Families package is based on targeted "tax relief" for those on lower incomes only.

Labour argues that targeted relief is more effective in that case and less costly than across-the-board tax cuts - the same argument that National uses to justify its planned cuts in primary healthcare spending.

Health Minister Annette King said Labour believed in universal health subsidies because "there should not be any arbitrary earnings barrier to anyone getting healthcare when they need it".

She warned of hidden agendas in National's message, saying it could lead to user charges in hospitals - a claim Dr Hutchison yesterday denied as "absolute rubbish".

The Nurses Organisation also opposed National's plan, with spokeswoman Laila Harre saying "as soon as you try and target care, far too many people miss out".

National is expected to offer subsidies through reviving the Community Services Card, but Ms Harre said a quarter to a third of those entitled to the card did not have one.

"Thousands of families missed out altogether because they were considered too rich to help - even though most of them were on modest incomes."

National has yet to say what its income eligibility thresholds for subsidies will be for 25- to 64-year-olds.

Deputy Prime Minister Michael Cullen said yesterday that the axing of the subsidies was "proof that tax cuts can only be afforded through cuts to core Government services".

"We've already seen National water down plans for defence spending. They will spend much less than Labour in tertiary education, with higher fees and lower student support. Now they're admitting that frontline health services will also be slashed."