Pages

Wednesday, July 3, 2024

Ele Ludemann: More should pay for prescriptions


The reinstatement of a $5 prescription charge will no doubt result in the media finding some sob stories.

It is a lot less likely there will be stories pointing out the major beneficiaries from the previous government’s removal of the fee were the big foreign-owned pharmacies that hadn’t been charging customers.

It is even less likely that any stories will have my view that more people should be paying the $5.

Exceptions to those being charged are:
  • those aged 13 or under;
  • Community Services cardholders (or a dependent child of a cardholder);
  • those aged 65 years or over;
  • people who hold a Prescription Subsidy Card (PSC).
I’d exclude everyone over 65 who isn’t eligible for a Community Services and/or Prescription Subsidy Card.

I defend universal superannuation because means testing would be a disincentive to thrift.

But any extra taxpayer funds on top of superannuation should be means-tested, including the $5 prescription fee.

The prescription fee has been reinstated to pay for cancer drugs. More for that is far better use of the money than letting wealthy pensioners off the $5 fee they could easily, and many would happily, pay themselves.

Ele Ludemann is a North Otago farmer and journalist, who blogs HERE - where this article was sourced.

1 comment:

Tinman said...

The maximum prescription fee per year is set at $100. i.e less than $2 per week.

Reducing all benefits by $2 per week and making all beneficiaries prescriptions cost free would free up far more money, both in administration and civil "servant" wages and would surely make more sense.

I have no idea what a Prescription Subsidy Card is but I'd charge all holders $100.pa to have one.

Post a Comment

Thanks for engaging in the debate!

Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.