A somewhat acrimonious controversy has arisen between the Minister of
Health and the Insurance Act Committee of the medical profession. The Committee originally proposed that the capitation fee for panel patients should be either raised from its present level of Os. 6d., or at any rate maintained undiminished. The Minister has replied in a detailed memorandum proposing a reduction to 8s. 6d. for a three years' or 8s. for a five years' contract. The Committee have now replied with an even longer and more detailed statement maintaining their original attitude, and fore- shadowing a refusal of the doctors, when they meet, to accept the Minister's terms. The whole controversy is based on the cost of living, the "pre-War standard," the difference between prices to-day and in 1921 when the last contract was made, and a comparison of the working expenses of doctors and Civil Servants. With such imponderable elements it is impossible for us to deal. The chief interest of the controversy seems to be that it is likely that the whole question of contracted medical services, and consequently of the Insurance Act, may come up again. The merits and demerits of the present system compared with that of unfettered medical individualism make an elaborate problem. Sir William Joynson-Hicks, the Minister of Health, proposes to set up a Royal Commission during the period of the next contract. Probably such a thorough and pro- tracted sifting of the considerations on both sides is necessary before any i * ai useful conclusion can be reached.
Previous page
