D66 accuses GroenLinks-PvdA of ‘care populism’ during the Great Healthcare Debate

The word cheating was not mentioned, but GroenLinks-PvdA and D66 clashed again on Tuesday evening during the Great Healthcare Debate in Utrecht about the ‘freezing’ of the basic healthcare package. Healthcare spokesperson Julian Bushoff (GroenLinks-PvdA) called D66’s proposal “ill-considered” and said that “that is not possible”. His colleague Wieke Paulusma (D66) accused Bushoff of “care populism”.

Last Sunday, during the second RTL election debate, Frans Timmermans (GroenLinks-PvdA) and Rob Jetten (D66) also clashed on the same theme. The calculations of the party programs by the Central Planning Bureau previously showed that D66 is one of the parties that “structurally freezes” the basic package, which means that no more treatments can simply be added.

Like Jetten, Paulusma also stated on Tuesday evening that her party does not impose a taboo on new treatments or medicines, but does want to “look critically at what is not effective and remove it from the package.” “That gives you a better basic package,” she said. Jetten mentioned a radio broadcast from BOOS here are a few examples: keyhole surgery, second opinions and treatments for older people who can hardly survive the subsequent rehabilitation.

Confusing discussion

The confusing basic package discussion has everything to do with how the CPB calculates. The CPB finds it difficult, if not impossible, to calculate measures in the areas of prevention, reforms of youth care and ‘caring neighborhoods’ (neighborhoods in which volunteers and care professionals work together to provide care), while they (in the long term) generate money.

That is why several parties chose to freeze the basic package, which does generate money for the CPB and ensures better calculation of their election manifesto. “Care has been a bone in the throat of the CPB since the start of the calculations,” said health economist Marcel Canoy, who also worked at the CPB for ten years, on Tuesday. NRC. He expects that new, effective medicines will continue to be included in the basic package in the coming years.

This does not alter the fact that the idea of ​​taking a critical look at which treatments and medications still need to be administered is widely shared in the healthcare sector and by politicians. It helps to reduce the ever-increasing healthcare costs and ensures that scarce personnel can be deployed more effectively.

The Great Healthcare Debate was organized for the fifth time. The debate is an initiative of twenty-three healthcare organizations, from the Federation of Medical Specialists and GGD GHOR Netherlands to the Netherlands Patient Federation and health insurers. Six parties were present; the five largest parties in the polls (PVV, CDA, GroenLinks-PvdA, D66 and VVD) and, remarkably, the much smaller SP. That party was invited because it profiles itself in the House of Representatives on healthcare and to get enough left-wing participants.

Give a gift





Part





Email the editor