Replies to LegCo questions

LCQ5: Fees and charges for public health care services

< Back

Following is a question by the Dr Hon Yeung Sum and a reply by the Secretary for Health, Welfare and Food, Dr York Chow, in the Legislative Council today (April 26):

Question:

The Chairman of the Hospital Authority (HA) told the media that he hoped to substantially increase a number of fees and charges for public health care services this year in order to maintain the quality of such services and prevent abuse. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a) whether it knows the rationale put forward by the Chairman of HA to substantiate his claim about the abuse of health care services and the ability of increased fees and charges to reduce such abuse, and whether the authorities will, before deciding whether or not to agree to the fee and charges increases, explore whether they can use other methods, such as improving the service delivery model and operation, etc, to reduce inappropriate use of health care services;

(b) of the number of submissions which opposed the substantial increases in fees and charges for public health care services received by the authorities in their consultation last year on the future service delivery model of health care services; whether the authorities, in studying whether or not to increase the fees and charges, will respond to these opposing views and consider putting in place a mechanism, whereby any adjustment in fees and charges for health care services must have the support of the public or their representatives; and

(c) whether the authorities will consider devising a set of clear and objective criteria to determine whether or not to increase the fees and charges for public health care services, such as linking the fees and charges for public health care services to the median income of the public for assessing and calculating such fees and charges?


Reply:

Madam President,

(a) The public medical services currently provided by the Hospital Authority (HA) are heavily subsidised. As a result, some users of HA's services may not be aware of the actual costs of the services they received, which may in turn lead to abusive use of such services and wastefulness of medical resources. It is, therefore, an important task of the Government to instil a more appropriate sense of value amongst the public so as to reduce instances of abuse and misuse.

The Administration and the HA are now conducting a new round of review of public medical fees with a view to targeting government subsidies on patients and services most in need as well as redressing the imbalance between the public and private services. In the review, we would also examine the existing fee waiver mechanism for public medical services to ensure that adequate services remain accessible to persons in economic hardship, including those not receiving Comprehensive Social Security Assistance.

At the present moment, the review is still in progress. Pending outcome of the review, the Administration and the HA would not have preconceived conclusion or decision on any possible proposals, including the possibility of increasing public medical fees.

Increasing public medical fees is indeed only one of the feasible options for reducing the misuse of medical services. The Administration and the HA would consider other options, including strengthening collaboration between the public and private medical sectors so as to ensure that our limited resources are used most effectively on those with genuine needs.

(b) In July 2005, the Health and Medical Development Advisory Committee issued the discussion paper "Building a Healthy Tomorrow". The main objective of the discussion paper is to explore the future service delivery model for our health care system. Amongst the topics discussed are elements that should be incorporated in the future delivery model, collaboration between the public and private medical sectors, positioning of the various levels of medical care, and the direction and principles for moving towards the future delivery model.

About 600 written submissions were received from various sectors of the community in response to the discussion paper. Of the submissions received,

* 7 submissions opposed clearly to any proposal for increasing the fees for accident and emergency services, specialist out-patient services and the supply of drugs in public hospitals;

* 15 submissions supported increasing the fees for such services so as to discourage the misuse of public medical services and redress the imbalance between the public and private medical sectors;

* 2 submissions supported in principle that medical fees should be increased, but suggested at the same time that the Government should establish some benchmarks for the determination of medical fees by private medical organisations.

We also received 77 messages posted on the Public Affairs Forum of the Home Affairs Bureau in response to the discussion paper. Of these messages,

* 7 respondents were of the view that improper use of accident and emergency services and ambulance services had put extra strain on HA's stringent financial resources. They suggested that the fees for these services should be increased so as to reduce abuse; and

* 4 respondents considered that the existing medical fees were too low. They supported increasing medical fees and that patients should be charged different levels of fees based on their affordability.

While the discussion paper was not published to solicit views on public medical fees particularly, we will take into consideration the views received from the public in respect of patients' affordability and consult the Legislative Council when evaluating any fee revision proposal.

(c) The Administration already has in place a set of comprehensive criteria for the review of public medical fees. The factors that will be taken into account include the overall costs of the public medical services; the level of government subsidies; how to better target existing government subsidies on patients most in need; and the need to instil a more appropriate sense of value of HA's services amongst users so as to reduce abusive use and wastefulness of medical resources. In addition, we will consider the affordability of users and provide a safety net for those in need.

In the provision of public medical services, the Administration has four priorities areas, which include, amongst others, the low-income group and the underprivileged, and the provision of acute and emergency care services. We will give due regard of these service priorities in our consideration of any fee revision proposal. Therefore, the factors that need to be taken into account have to be comprehensive and wide-ranging. Affordability of members of the public is also one of the factors to be considered. The important point is that we already have in place a well-established fee waiver mechanism to provide a safety net for those who need to use public medical services but have difficulty in paying for the fees, and to ensure that they would not be deprived of the appropriate medical care due to financial hardship.


Ends/Wednesday, April 26, 2006
Issued at HKT 12:59

NNNN

12 Apr 2019