Friday, 26th September 2008 - 11:55CET
Church suggests nominal fee for medicines distributed by the state
A Church commission proposed today that the government should charge a nominal fee on medicines currently distributed free of charge. It said the government should also charge hospitalisation fees for those holding private health insurance.
The recommendations are part of a long list published by the Curia as a reaction to the pre-budget document.
The commission urged the government to revise the minimum wage, increase parental leave and outsource surgery to private hospitals as a means to reducing the waiting list at Mater Dei Hospital.
In its list, the Justice and Peace Commission called for better allowances to disabled children, a paternity leave quota to encourage male spouses to shoulder part of the burden of raising children, and an increase of parental leave to 17 weeks for the second child and 21 weeks for the third child.
The commission said the fiscal benefit available to those parents who send their children to kindergartens or private schools should be increased gradually over a definite period, until the entire fee is allowed as a deduction against income for tax purposes. The same system should also be applied to residents in private residential homes for senior citizens.
“A process should be initiated for the revision of the minimum wage, over a period of not more than three years, to an amount which will guarantee a modest standard of living. Persons in receipt of a minimum wage are living below the poverty line and are therefore considered vulnerable,” the commission said.
Premiums payable on private health and pension schemes should be fully deductible against income for tax purposes, it said.
It also said that those in receipt of a service pension should be entitled to receive the social security pension in full.
The commission said interest paid on loans for the purchase of the first residence should be fully deductible against income for tax purposes. This benefit should be capped on a specific loan amount.
The government should also carry out an evaluation that would determine the special needs of Church schools for the employment of facilitators with children with special needs, counsellors and social workers, educational psychologists, career advisers, activity teachers, health and safety teachers, computer technicians and relief teachers. The cost thereof should be borne by government.
In other recommendations, is said the age limit for the consumption of alcohol should be immediately raised to 18 years with a plan for this to be extended to 21 years within three years.
The tax on alcoholic beverages and tobacco should be increased substantially as a disincentive to drinking and smoking.
Hefty fines should also be introduced for the emission of poisonous fumes by public transport vehicles and other heavy vehicles as a result of abuse in the mixing of fuels for economic reasons.
When it spoke on health, the commission said a nominal fee should be introduced on medicines currently distributed by the government free of charge. Furthermore, a pro-forma invoice should be issued with medicines highlighting the cost to government and the benefit being received by the beneficiary.
“A nominal fee should be introduced on medicines currently distributed by the government free of charge. Furthermore, a pro-forma invoice should be issued with medicines, highlighting the cost to government and the benefit being received by the beneficiary," the commission said.
Government should charge fees for hospitalization in Government hospitals to all those who subscribe to a private health insurance," it said.
Comments
The tax on alcoholic beverages and tobacco should be increased as a disincentive to drinking and smoking."
What next people under the age of 18 have to wear Chastity belts?
These recommendations are an attack on our freedoms, very soon they'd be suggesting age limits on Coffee & chocolate.
I thought the clergy has travelled around the world enough to realise that in Places (like USA) where Alcohol is illegal for under-21's, there still is illegal consumption (untaxed of course) and Alcohol is misused frequently. In any case most of my generation have been drinking before 16.
Putting up Taxes on cigarettes will only increase the consumption of untaxed cigarettes, after all untaxed cigarettes only started showing up in the streets when they put cigarettes up from 60cents to lm1.05 and now bars are making profits from selling singles!
The higher the sin tax, the higher profits for criminals. Does the clergy finance those who break the law?
WE are NOT saved by our works and how good we be during our lives and by how much charity we do or by attending mass on Sunday or by any sacrament that the roman catholic church invented We can never ever save ourselves !. BUT by The Grace of God Eph 2:8,9 "For by Grace are you saved through Faith:not of yourselves: it is the gift of Go: not of works, less any man should boast" and you should be Born Again in Jesus Christ !
John 3:3 "Except a man be born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God"
John 3:16, John 3:36. John 6:37 John 10:28, John 14:6, Acts 16:31, Romans 3:23, Romans 6.23, Romans 10:9,10, 2 Corinthians 5:17, Ephesians 2:8,9, Titus 3:5
These Holy Scriptures should lead you to Salvation Jesus Christ`s way is not the same as the roman catholicism ....
would you trust your salvation on Jesus Christ or the Vatican ?
I think this time it`s time for the church to start giving back some of that, that it has been taken of Maltses families!
Thats it problem solved !
QUOTE: "In this way such service are more protected from abuses from certain citizens that do not need such medicines at all"
so it works like this. the governmet introduces a nominal fee on all medicines. The abusers stop getting thir medicines as they can afford to go without them (remember they sell them or flush them down the toilet) but people like me who need my medicine must continue to collect them thus we are the ones left paying the fee. Would it not be a great idea (besides being a logical one) if the abusers are caught and stopped rather than tax the honest citizen?
As you suggested the government can raise the income tax ceiling by quite a few notches or he can stop the abusers! ever thought of that? Anyone needing medicines has to have a permit from a consultant. If someone benefitting from this system dies the authorities are informed and the distribution of medicines in his/her name is stopped. so what's the problem? the solution is not to tax he honest citizen but to catch and punish the thief
The church has always preeched that it is always teaching the divine methods, which are always ethically correct, unlike politics.
A few months ago the curia didn't allow church school students to take part in a teenage sex survey.
I have always believed that something is wrong, and this is really giving me a verification.
Why doesn't the curia take a look around itself and then a very good one at the mirror, trying to find out how to solve its problems first.
It must be noted that during the Sant Government, illegal migration was not an urgent priority issue on national political level as today, and therefore the PN had an argument on the issue of unsocial measures of taxation, but things change in 10 years time and will continue to change in the future 10 years for example. Therefore the heath care will continue to improve with the possibility of new operations being performed locally. The question for all of us at this time is:
Do we need free health care for all of us (even those that earn a very good salary) or it is better to introduce nominal fee and guarantee the service provided locally and if possible introducing new services at our general hospital for those really in need?
The crux of the matter is that:
1. When Freddie proposed it Eddie demonized him
2. The Prime Minister gave his word (before the elections) that medicare will be free and does not want to do a U-turn.
3. It would be very irresponsible to implement the financial electoral promises in the current climate.
So (to the tune of ghostbusters) who d'you gonna call??? The Archbishop!!! - to issue a statement to this effect.
If the church wants to help out (working out a nominal charge of €1 per medicine + the usage incurred) it should suggest to the government to tax her on her income at 3% per annum.
Apart from the natural decline in influence, the church keeps making more 'faux pas' to accelerate such a decline.
They better point the fingers at themselves and try to remove the disgusting tarnish and image they have produced..
My suggestion to the church is to crawl back in their little holes. if its such a concern to them they might as well start selling off their glodmines land they have in Malta and Gozo.
The point is, the Church has nothing whatsoever to do with Christ or his teachings but a lot to do with the material world and the business world. You could call the Roman Catholic Church the World's oldest and largest Multi-National Corporation. And if you wish to learn more about how a Corporation operates, I suggest the documentary "The Corporation", which can be easily found on the internet.
As a matter of fact I do have diabetics in my family. I only wished to point out that the pink form has nothing to do with diabetes. Its a means test. As you may be aware, diabetes does not only strike the people living below the poverty line but can hit anyone. Those living below the poverty line are definitely entitled for the pink form (means test) and that is what I call fair social services. If you manage to convince me that fillings, dentures, spectacles and the other illnesses are directly related to Diabetes, then go ahead and have them for free.
I'm not sure I ever insulted Diabetic patients in my comment below as insulting is beyond me.
Quote;
they want to shut the Church when it comes with some other civil state issues like the abuse of free health services, abuse from free medicinal supplies, abuse from social services benefits,
The church's proposal has nothing to do with checking abuses. if the suggestion is implemented everyone will be hit including those who do not abuse the system. In fact these last will ultimately be the only ones who will pay this fee as the ones who can do without the medicines will stop buying them.
this is like suggesting the government fine every driver in malta because there are drivers who contravene the traffic regulations. The solution is to curb the abusers.
finally you contadict yourself in this sentence;
"Abuse of Govt free services is 'stealing' from my and your taxes "
they are either free or they are being paid for out of OUR taxes.
I do not wish you ever have diabetic persons in your family ...... but you do not know what it means. Please do not insult any one because all you wish to others will come back to you.... and you begin moaning that diabetic citizens live beyond the poverty line.
Please check before you speak
Don't you know that the Church gave nearly all its land to the Government in the State-Church schools agreement???????????? That was over 10 years ago!
they want the Church to say yes to divorce, which is really a civil state issue (since it is very clear that the practising catholics abide by the church's teachings and those pro-divorce might not really concern themselves - or at the least want an exception - to its teachings)
and at the same time....
they want to shut the Church when it comes with some other civil state issues like the abuse of free health services, abuse from free medicinal supplies, abuse from social services benefits, abuse from alcohol etc etc......
Abuse of Govt free services is 'stealing' from my and your taxes and so I see no harm in the Church talking freely in support of effirts to curb these abuses.
Are we not free to state what we feel is right ?
For those who are not aware, the 'karta roza' entitles you to free medicinals, free spectacles, free dentures and dental fillings and also free custom foot soles. All these items cost the government 1000's of Euros annually from diabetic patients only.
In the past, diabetic patients were issued a diabetic blue card, and they used to get all the medicines pertaining to their illness for free. Something I am not against. But handing out everything for free to diabetics irrespective of their income, is insane.
Its good to be Diabetic in Malta!!!!!!
It is not possible to file an insurance claim for a service received but for which no fee is paid. People who hold (and pay for) private health insurance sometimes need to make use of public hospitals because private hospitals do not provide the same range of services. There is no "enrichment", justified or otherwise.
Are you perhaps referring to fraudulent claims? Fraudulent claims cannot be honoured under any insurance policy so if and whenever you have evidence of such fraud you could report it to the police and to the insurance company concerned. Contrary to what you might believe, insurance companies do not like to be defrauded.
In other words, deducting school fees from taxable income is not a subsidy lumped onto other taxpayers, but the opposite.
In any case, you needn’t worry. The content and general tone of your comment suggests that you do not pay much tax anyway.
Fortunately Major Political Parties and now the Justice and Peace Commission appear to have convergent views
Meanwhile note that on average more than 50 Beds in our State Hospitals are occupied by foreigners who fall ill whilst on Holiday in Malta, annual cost exceeds 10 million Euros.
We need to ensure that the state is reimbursed
Private Insurance
BUPA has cash benefit schemes rewarding patients up to 58 Euros for every day that the patient lingers in a state hospital
The insurance company benefits as liability is limited to 58 Euros Daily, they do not have to pay for hospital fees nor doctors fees nor for any pharmaceuticals or expensive consumables.
These are being paid by us.
Instead of relieving the pressure from NHS hospitals, these insurance schemes are riding piggy back on the NHS increasing the problems for the NHS.
Once the patient is accepting the cash benefit then the insurance policy has been activated and the NHS should invoice the insurance company for all medical expenses incurred by the NHS for that patient.
Frank Portelli MD FRCS(ED)
And what about those parents who send their children to Church schools. They are getting nothing, although they pay for the school fee - "donation", books, school equipment, etc.
And please do mind your own business do not influence people with you ideas.
Recently I noticed something disturbing, well at least disturbing to me. At a local grocery store there is the occasional person who does not pay for their shopping but the owner enters the name and amount in a book. Let me stress that the items bought are nothing luxurious but things like a loaf, cheese and ham. I think that the church for all its defects may be more in touch with these realities than any of us.
Meanwhile a pharmacist working at a government dispensary told me that very, but very rarely relatives of a deceased person return unused medicine to the pharmacy for proper disposal (the medicines are destroyed and never re dispensed once they have left the pharmacy). He told me about a case where a relative brought back a huge amount of never opened bottles of a very expensive medicine which the old person had been collecting and never using... because they were free. Cost?: a few Thousand euros.
But with this Commission the Church is now sniffing its nose up the state's nose. And to add insult to injury all the suggestions recommend funding fromthe government! What about the millions the Church has hiddenhere and there, the properties it could sell to make some of these suggestions really happen if it really beleivesin social justice.
TheChurch should not only preach but set a living example. When it does that maybe the governmentof the day would bat alid and put someof its proposals in action.
If the Churchaptly thinks its about time it startsgiving to the poor what it has taken from the poor, then I ll be damned. But I havent seen this happen over the last fifty years and would never think theyre ready to do it now!
As always though Commissions, reports, but money forking !
The Govt, is doing his best to Help the Welfare State, and you suggest such a Big Sin.
This Govt, Helped a lot ' when he the Govt Had removed the 50 cents for a visit to the Polyclinic's Doctor, Plus another 1 Lm when a certificate was made.
Well Said Mr Philip Pace ,Well Said .
Or else all the fuss is because there was a Labour government?!!!!!
1) It starts to use it land, to build housing for young couples and sell them at cost price
2) Start giving free uniforms, and other needs for free in there schools
3) Start reporting to the police itself priests and nuns who abuse children and not hide them
4) Ask people to donate cash instead of spending their money on feasts, and then they subsidize old people's home, for those who cannot afford it.
I guess old habits die hard and it is still difficult for the Church to accept and come to terms with the separation of Church and State. Maybe it is high time for the State to start making suggestions on how the Church should be run too - how about starting from releasing the vast land holdings they had obtained through promises of eternal life and give them back to the people, after all Christ did say "My kingdom is not of this World". If the Church does not believe this word of Christ, what makes it think that we should therefore believe in any other thing the Church says or does.
It would have been a Better idea IF,
You have suggested, that the Church is going to Share the medicines Expences with the Goverment !!
anyway yes I do agree to pay a small fee sure do ! ONLY IF WHEN I GO TO COLLECT MY MONTHLY MEDICINE, THE SPIZJAR WONT TELL ME, THESE ARE OUT OF STOCK OR WORSE, THAT THE GOVERMENT DO NOT HAVE ALL THE MEDICINES THAT ,
A NORMAL PHARMACY HAS !!!
Halluna, why are you trying to put more Burden on the people especially the one's with Socail Beneficts ?? Cissssss !
The Catholic Church has usurped the monopoly for all that is good and righteous when its own credentials are dubious at best. How do they do it? It merits a whole series on the Discovery Channel.
@ J Martinelli
I bet you have a sign on your desk saying:
"Those of you who think you know everything are annoying those of us who do."
a very low nominal fee for these services makes sense and reduces abuse and waste. Politicians from both sides need to debate this issue to unlock themselves from the political ideology that services have to be given free. NOTHING is free, everything comes at a cost. I understand that the taxpayer is burdened by so many taxes but fees applied to reduce waste will eventually pay up to the tax payer at a later stage. Politics apart, we all have to think in ways which enhances the maltese economy for the benefit of ALL. I suppose the issue should be brought up for discussion and review, not to discriminate on the parties (citizens) affected.
It would have been better if this church commission would not interfere with the state.
Of course it can propose but it has to propose REAL AND TANGIBLE THINGS.
Wouldn't it be a u-turn if the Government accepts this proposal as I remember what the Labour Govt did in 1995 making us pay .50c for the medicines?
But I am sure that this Govt would not accept this unsocial proposal.
If Roman Catholic church would like to help, that is no problem with me. It can start by restoring the irregularly acquired lands ( on deathbeds, confessions and other underhand/sleazy deals)to the rightful owners, then sell it's undeclared and hidden assets ( especially the treasures that it holds) and with the money that comes in, divides it with the poor and unfortunate.
It would never do that as it would affect its business.
And what is the nominal fee that it is proposing? Would this be tax deductible?
What about those who live on their own?
Just like each political party nobody thinks about them.
Blessed bananas
Don't resort to baseless arguments when you find yourself indefensible.
If you had an opportunity to experience a life beyond your 122 square miles, you would not argue the way you do.
You contradict yourself when you say that we cannot go on getting everything for free then you say that nothing is free as we are paying taxes. That's the point. If we are made to pay for medicines we would be paying twice for the same thing. Now if the government were to reduce taxes in a realistic way that would be a different story but we know governments.
This is the Maltese mentality which has to change. And whatever we all say very hastily, it WILL change. It has to change. After all, we are not getting anything for free. These are our taxes. This is not politics and there was no need for the church to tell us all this. Those with some common sense know it.
So with your way of thinking the government should impose a fine on every driver in malta because everyone breaks the highway code sometimes but not everyone gets caught!!
The solution is to catch the culprits and punish them not fine everybody across the board.
I never abuse the system. I need my medicines and I never have surplus for myself let alone to sell. I am already paying for the medicined through my taxes and if I am made to pay for them a second time it would leave a large hole in my not so substantial salary. i am also the only bread winner in my family.
I agree that the Maltese people must pay for the medical service. Many people take unnecessary medicine because it's free, and either they sell it, give it away or throw it away. After all, today everyone can afford and abroad everyone pays.
You're lumping everyone in the same basket which isn't fair. I for one never abuse of the system as I need my medicines which are very expensive and if I had to pay (twice) for them I would be left with a large chunk of my salary missing. If you can afford to pay for your medicine if you take any, then go ahead and pay but not everyone is in your position.
But the most amazing thing from many contributors is the selective reading: the proposals deal with benefits, deal with children and many more.
The Church is made up of people who have the right to voice their concerns. Most of the comments arise from people who usually flag these rights, but they are inconsistent in their capacity to listen to others.
As usual why write to the unconverted!
It would have been better had the church commission (CC) analysed the fees charged by private medicine. Lately a visit to a consultant ended with a request for EUR246 as a fee for a 45 minute examination!
It would have been better had the CC emphasised the idea of service in the professions, which are fast becoming mere money making routes.
It would have been more helpful had the CC pointed out the new ways persons in certain offices are using their positions to extort payments for services which do not carry a fee...
It would have been more useful if the CC had spoken more openly on new forms of exclusion and the increasing impoverishment of pensioners, especially on the discrepancies that openly exist between how MPs pensions are calculated in comparison to how the pension of the common folk is calculated....
And so much more please...and base your recommendations on facts, on numbers!
@Franco Farrugia,
I thought you were always supporting foreigners to interfere in our own matters, why not now?
Make everyone pay to be civilized.
@Francis Zammit. A.Sant's logic was bad because he was going to impose the 50c tax on everyone. Those who were abusing would have stopped receiving their medicines because they could afford to go without. while those who were honest and really needed the medicine would have to go on paying the tax.ergo the 50c would have been paid by the honest ones.
Did you consider the millions that the Church is getting every year from our taxes for its schools and yet asks for a "contribution" from the parents?
A contribution indeed when the children are reminded before the whole class that their parents have not yet made their "contribution"!
@Charles Busuttil
Right you are Charles.
@J Martinelli
The sapitutto emigrant from afar.
Church, who's pulling your strings?
What has the paying of a nominal fee for the dispensing of 'free medicines' got to do with the voluntary contributions to the collection plate?
First of all, the church is delivering a service - albeit aimed at your soul and has to pay for the upkeep of churches and paying its employees. Secondly, you said it yourself - putting a few cents in the collection plate is a 'contribution', therefore voluntary. So, don't mix apples with oranges. Maybe you are one of those who a few decades ago instructed your friends not to throw anything in the 'sassla'?
Why should the government pay the pharmacist to dispense the medicine to patients?
As always, something for nothing is by far the preferred option we all seem to aspire for.
@ Franco Farrugia
I hate ignorance. I detest 'island mentalities'. I know what I talk about - you don't. Grow up - not old.
It seems to me that that after all Dr.A.Sant was right again,I say again because he was right about the EU. look what we're going trough with the immigrants.And now the CHURCH is PROVING him right again when he put a 50 cent charge on free madicine.
YES WHEN SOMETHING IS FREE IT'S ABUSED
Some of u who posted comments on this topic don't even realise that our society is getting crappier by the second, and I question “why?”. The answer is because people are greedy and give more importance to “human rights” (without determining its social effects), than duties.
I’m disappointed how the church didn’t criticise Joseph Muscat when he said that divorce is a civil right when the aim of the church is to reconcile broken / almost broken families.
And yes I’m against gay weddings and divorce.
who told the church that the medicines are free? we are paying for them through our taxes.
And may I ask what prompted the church to make such a suggestion?
will the church perhaps waive the contributions for masses to take us to heaven?
In my opiniohn, suggesting the introduction of a fee when collecting free medicine is un-social and un-Christian. Regarding the Private Health Scheme issue, I can see the end-result being that of an increase in premium paid by the citizen.
Honestly, it is shocking to me that the Church has decided to tread where angels fear to tread!
May I congratulate you on your continued interest in your homeland's affair. It is wonderful that an emigrant of long standing is so well acquainted with our problems and often makes better contributions than the locals!.
I am an anzjan, but I also live in a society which accepts the fact that there is nothing for free. By the way, please read my comment again. I did not recommend anything, I just pointed out how things work in a country far richer and can afford much more than Malta can. Yet, yes, when a government deems it necessary to introduce fees, replace brand medicine with generics, close hospital beds and charge for ambulance transport, we grumble for a while, then get used to it. The alternative is usually much worse.
@ V Fenech
If I wanted to politicize the issue, I would have damned the MLP, but do not forget that the 50c you talk about was only one of several measures which, at the time, were disproportionate with the circumstances such as the drastic increase in water and electricity bills considering the price of oil was only $12 a barrel and the poll tax and also there was to be a cost in order to obtain a doctor's certificate.
To say that the 50c was exorbitant, I would be lying. In fact that is low. We have to change with the times!
If the Church responds to a general invitation to all of us to submit proposals for the next budget it is accused of interfering with the functions of the state. If it doesn't respond it will be accused once more of not caring for the common good of society!
Some people will never be satisfied no matter whatever the Church does or refrains from doing.
It's easy for people like Mr Martinelli to speak out of their hats and criticise those of us who really know what is going on and who are constantly aware how things could easily effct the standard of living in our country, a country which Mr Martinelli is not living in.
Hence, give everyone a break.
as with regards to fees on medicines - i agree, nothing is free in life and the sooner we understand it the better. it all comes out of our pockets. if one had to quantify what the public healthcare will cost over a ten year period, one would quickly realise we would all be better off if the government simply insured its citizens privately instead.
It seems that now the church has become an expert on everything and thinks that we are still in the days when it was the "hidden government", where it used to pull political strings to influence social decisions.
Well, dear Curia, those days are over and defunct!!!!
On what study did they base their recommendations to make people pay a nominal fee for medicines? What about the elderly? What about the people marginalised by society due to various reasons?
How about helping out with the money thrown in by the faithful every Sunday?
Dear Curia, as you can see from this blog, YOU HAVE OPENED A CAN OF WORMS
I think their logic is the other way round... the government has government schools which he does maintain and provide good teachers for.
If the church is not making ends meet, they should decide to either close down, or else decide if they want to remain a free school paid for by the church, or else if they want to be a cut above the rest a private school, and charge private school fees.
Re the nominal fee for medicine, it may look as anti-social; however it’s also a small deterrent against unnecessary and excessive usage.
If we do like what the church says,, people working at the hospital shall start giving preferential treatment to those with insurances,, leaving back others who are most in need.... People with private insurance trust me will not go to the state hospital.. not they are paying.
I think that the church commission should do like what the archbishop said, DO NOT INTERFERE WITH THE STATE AND POLITICS, and stick to try and teach religion, and focus on bringing back all those who have lost faith. I think God shall be more grateful..
For more information, we all pay taxes. :)
Is the church aware the sacrifice certain families go through to be able to buy this insurance?
This insurance is not a luxury but a necessity. Is the church aware how many years a person need to wait for certain operations and treatment, like for example to have a hip or a knee replacement?
Person with health insurance are paying 3 times as much as others:-
a) through direct taxation (social security etc)
b) vat was increased from 15% to 18% to make good for govt healthcare some years ago
c) Health Insurance Premiums
How about the church contributing for our healthcare? Then maybe we would not have any long hospital lists any longer and thus there would be no need for Private Health Insurance .
I take it you'r not ANZJAN YET?? or you have a very good pension!! to suggets $100,is hefty,for some ANZJANI!!
Those who wish to see information and its members, kindly follow this site:
http://www.maltadiocese.org/justice-and-peace-commission
I see no reason why many of you are unjustly attacking our beloved Archbishop Cremona. He did not draft the recommendations himself, and this is not the firrst time that this Commission presented its proposals. Anyone interested can visit the site to check for himself.
I also wonder why many of the critics did not open up their mouth when many of the church members were physically assaulted and had their properties and cars burnt for speaking in favour of the poor!!!!! I really wonder why!!!!
Dear commission, i pay my taxes, i pay my NI and social security contributions.
I send my children to a private school, have purchased my own house witha 40 year house loan, and use private health care. I have never been a burden to the the state.
Now you come up with the bright idea that ui should even pay hospital fees should I ever need to go to a public hospital, just becuase i have opted for a private insurance poilicy and have saved the state money when using private healthcare.
I think your job should be saving souls and trying to attract the ever dwindling church going population and even smaller practicing Catholics population and not come up with warped economic policy.
There is another item suggested in the abovementioned proposals. This is the 'outsource surgery to private hospitals as a means to reducing the waiting list at Mater Dei Hospital'. Let me remind those who are too young to remember or those who do not WANT to remember, that this is exactly what Mr. Dom Mintoff wanted to do at the then Blue Sisters Hospital. Did the pious nuns accept? No. They preferred to nurse back to health servicemen down with syphilles than open their wards to Maltese nationals who could not afford to pay for the nun's services. That is why they up and left the country with the blessing of the church in Malta and after protests against Mr Mintoff personally in London.
I think the church is being sensible here and is stepping in to suggest what both the MLP and the PN should be doing. They are obviously not doing it because it has become a political football, but that does not mean it should not be done.
Besides its in the church's interest to lead the general population away from a culture which thinks that ceratin things come for free - not that there are many left, but anyhow.
Re the minimum fee when getting medicines from the government (as in the famous 50c), I agree 100%. However there may be implementation problems due to the Pharmacy of your Choice scheme since community pharmacists would now have to take care of collecting this fee.
The tax rebate on private schools is NOT a subsidy. People sending children to private schools are paying taxes to fund government schools. They are also reducing the burden on the state by sending their children to private schools rather than making use of a service that is theirs by right. Imagine the problem the government would have if suddenly all children in private schools were sent to government schools! The government would have to spend tens of millions on building and running new schools. So the rebate is not a subsidy. Rather it is a partial refund to parents who are subsidising government schools with their taxes but not using them.
Hasn't the Church interfered more than enough in the Maltese political scene? Need we go back to the 60s and their whistle-blowing nuns, ringing church-bells and the "interdett" to shut the Labourites up to make it easier for the PN to gain power? The Church should butt out of Politics and carry on with its "job"; because that's just what it is for them - a JOB.
This reminds me of an old joke (unfortunately, this does not translate into English!)
"What are the Church's favorite fruit, favorite fish and favorite car?
The answer is;
TINA (fig and give us [singular])
TUNA (the fish and give us [plural])
JEEP! (the car and colloqual "give here")
Why is it that the same names always crop up complaining about anything and everything? Why is it that these same people ALWAYS want something for nothing? Do they not give one an impression that given a choice, they would sit in their rear end day in, day out, waiting for a cheque in their mailbox?
Why don't they do some research first and find out how other countries handle the issue of 'free medicines'?
Most other countries allow the pharmacy to charge a 'Dispensing Fee', in other words, the medicine is still free but the pharmacy staff has to be paid their wages and why should the pharmacy subsidize the client by not charging for the time spent counting their pills and giving instructions how the medicine should be taken? In this regard I am referring to Senior Citizens (Anzjani). An alternative, as is done in Ontario, the patient pays the first $100.00 each year on his or her birthday which takes care of the dispensing fee for the year.
Anyone younger than a Senior Citizen, would find it hard to find a country where medicine is given out for free. Most carry private insurance paid by them, or jointly with their employer and usually such insurance pays 85% of the cost of the drug. The other 15% plus dispensing fee is paid by the patient.
When the 'Pharmacy of your choice' spreads throughout the islands, pharmacies will be networked through a computer system, hopefully eliminating the duplication of medicines to the same patient. Since pharmacies today are computerized, it would be simple to issue a receipt to the patient showing the true value of the medicine and a credit of similar value paid by the government on his behalf. Many think that because medicine is free, it does not cost a cent!
Finally, for those who think that the Church should not get involved, I say to them, give it a rest! Any individual or NGO has the right to express their opinion and the church should not be the exception. I find it incomprehensible how the system allows yahoos who write nonsense, but if the church opines about an important social issue, they flare up.
I hope this isn't a tactic by the goverment to test the waters before he introduces such fees, because we all remember very clearly what happened when Dr Sant introduced such a fee.
On the other hand, certain proposals like that concerning alcahol and tabacco are superficial. The same goes for the fees in the state hospital. If for any time an insured will need to enter hospital and pay a fee as there will be the insurance company to make good for, the latter would eventually raise the premium and therefore continue to increase the already excessive expenditure of a normal family.
Do I get you right Anne?
You go to the Government hospital, you get free service, you file a claim with your health insurance, you get compensated, and you expect the Government not to charge you?
Don't you think that that is what is called unjustified enrichment?
"The government should also carry out an evaluation that would determine the special needs of Church schools for the employment of facilitators with children with special needs, counsellors and social workers, educational psychologists, career advisers, activity teachers, health and safety teachers, computer technicians and relief teachers. The cost thereof should be borne by government."
Why should we, the taxpayers, continue to be burdened for your private gain?
Make the services available if they are not already at Government schools and those who opt to send their children to your schools should pay themselves for your and their extravaganza if they do not want to avail themselves of Government schools and services.
Furthermore, what you are asking is against eu law because you will be favoured with respect to other private schools who would be entitled to the same services.
Unbelievable how low the church is going lately.
'The government should also carry out an evaluation that would determine the special needs of Church schools for the employment of facilitators with children with special needs, counsellors and social workers, educational psychologists, career advisers, activity teachers, health and safety teachers, computer technicians and relief teachers. The cost thereof should be borne by government.'
Instead of taking a common front in curbing a bit this flagrant abuse, the PN in 1998 found it appropriate to take political mileage out of this minute issue. Now will see if the PN makes a huge u-turn.
Malta urgently needs political maturity... and I feel that from one side of the spectrum there is change.
PAY TO HEAR MASS?
The cherry falls on church schools, and where else. The most holy commission advises that Government should set up a commission to study what ails church schools and then pay for what remedies heals them. This of course out of our tax money and the very socially just payments (nominal or not) for national health (hitherto free) the same commission suggests.
Why not recommend the Goverment to tell us at what time we need to use the bathroom, not to say more
IT's Better if the church shuts up and mind its own House which is out of order.
I beg to differ. Right now there are far greater problems than social justice which are effecting religion, spirituality and christian values in general. Yet the Catholic Church is so used to meddling into state affairs, that it cannot stop itself from interfering on such matter. The commision's report would have been more fitting coming from any political party, rather than the Catholic Church.
Of course we all believed him that he is not going to interfere in the state matters!!!!
This is another polical party
As regards private insurance, I also agree that the government should charge those who have a private insurance if they use the public hospital. But the amount one pays yearly for the Health Insurance should be deducted from income tax. This had been promised in 1998 ( by this government ) but never materliazed like other promises after all!! It is unjust that those paying a private health insurance and therefore make use of private hospitals thus reducing the burden on the public ones are not given an incentive. What incentive? What is this???? What are we waiting for? At the end of the day, the governemt would be making bigger savings because the savings on the hospitals would be much greater than the deductions from the income tax. Is it possible that no financial wizard never worked this one out.? Apparently not.
The cherry falls on church schools, and where else. The most holy commission advises that Government should set up a commission to study what ails church schools and then pay for what remedies heals them. This of course out of our tax money and the very socially just payments (nominal or not) for national health (hitherto free) the same commission suggests. Whoever said that the Church of Christ died in 33BC to be replaced by the church of man is a blasheming heretic who should be burned at the stake.
The church should make an excercise. Charge a fee for the host and for attending church and we will see how many saintly church goers will still go. Then I will prove my point.
Does the Church know what it is letting itself in for?
Or is it being used in some way, for some reason?
Considering that the Church, as the mouthpiece and factual defender for the downthrodden, would do better to explain in simple terms the methodology that lead to these conclusions. I might agree on the substance but a nominal fee for medicines distributed by state is penalizing those weak strata of society that are entitled to such so it would be interesting to see the logic for such a conclusion.
While the claim for further subsidy and assistance to Church Schools do make sense on the other hand the Church should agree to provide state schools with Free Religious education to all students in public schools.
Having said this the Church should also give an example by reducing the waste of money spent on feasts and church and statues embellishments.
Today's statement sounds more like a political party press release coming directly from the PN / MLP headquarters.
Please stick to teaching religeon, and leave the budget to tax payers and politicians
The Chuch's favourite song is
Money money money is the rich man's world
So why did all hell break loose when a registration fee was introduced by the 1996-98 Labour Government?
"The commission said the fiscal benefit available to those parents who send their children to kindergartens or private schools should be increased gradually over a definite period, until the entire fee is allowed as a deduction against income for tax purposes."
These snobs can send their children to the Government schools and save their money not lump their subsidies on other taxpayers.
At least the Church seems to be converting to those social principles that many had fought against during the various Labour administrations.
The Church has a right to put proposals which affect social justice. Anzi, it is it's duty to put forward proposals regading social issues. This is the same Commission who also makes pleas in favour of the poor, immigrants, disabled, etc.
I wonder why many of you never utter a word when the Church is attacked when speaking in favour of the less fortunate.
Dear Church stick to the matters of the soul, dont go down that road..... again!!