26 August 2005
National confirms it will cut health services
National has confirmed that it will not sustain the Labour Government’s health funding path, and that will inevitably
lead to cuts to health services, says Health Minister Annette King.
Ms King says that in an interview in the New Zealand Herald (published August 26) National health spokesperson Dr Paul
Hutchison says National will spend “less money” than Labour.
“This confirms what we already knew was likely to happen. You can’t offer tax bribes and at the same time retain
essential public services. The first casualties on Dr Hutchison’s hit list will be universal funding for cheaper
doctors’ visits and prescriptions and reduced funding for our hospitals, and we can also say goodbye to the half billion
dollar pay increase nationally for nurses.
“Stage two in his programme will inevitably be charges for hospital services, like the 1990s, because if they are
opposed to universal funding for primary health care, then they can hardly justify free hospital treatment for everyone.
“And stage three is likely to be a halt to new building projects. We all know what happened in the 1990s when small
communities had to link hands round their hospitals to try to save them. That no longer happens. This Government is
committed to improving services in rural and provincial areas, not stripping them. National clearly favours forced
amalgamations of District Health Boards. Watch out Rotorua, Whangarei, Wanganui, Wairarapa and Timaru if National gets
in.”
Ms King says the Government’s commitment to effective and responsive health services for all New Zealanders has been
reflected in new budget spending of $969.7 million in 2005-06 and $4.09 billion over the next four years. "This level of
funding provides the health sector with the certainty it needs, but certainty would go out the window if National got
into office. Who knows if they would even retain beyond this year the extra funding, that this Government has made
provision for, for inflationary and demographic pressures?”
Ms King says National tries to fudge its intentions by saying it will eliminate waste and bureaucracy, but it has no
idea what bureaucrats it would get rid of. “Are they referring to people who book operations, to telephonists, to
receptionists? The only thing for sure is that National is committed to tax cuts for the rich and it won’t give a toss
which public health services have to go out the window to get there.”
ENDS