Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-04-27-Speech-3-095"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050427.10.3-095"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner, let me start by congratulating the rapporteur on the balance of his report. The development of high-quality health care inevitably entails rising costs, and if policy takes no account of this fact, we cannot help ending up with first and second-class medicine. History shows us who gets less care under those circumstances. We can expect to live longer, and, when I say it is fortunate that there are more and more older people, I mean that in the sense that major issues always bring with them new ideas and innovation, so it may well be that the EU of 25 or 27 will thereby be turned into a humane society founded upon solidarity. It is for that reason that this report makes the specific point that particular care needs to be taken to maintain equity if the poorer members of society are to bear an ever-greater share of the cost of healthcare.
Within the EU – by which I now mean the EU of 27 – health provision varies from one extreme to another. In terms of costs, this means that countries’ expenditure on healthcare varies from 4% to 9% of their gross domestic product. Of the new Member States, the poorest spend the least and also have the worst health provision. That is a fact. It does not, however, simply mean that spending more adds up to better performance. That requires more efficient management and particular attention to the type of care and the demand for it if health provision and long-term care are to be funded in the long run. This calls for a European benchmark and open coordination.
The last point I want to make about cost is that the United States spend nearly 14% of their gross domestic product on health, and make a poor job of sharing it out. We cannot aim to do that, and nor should we. We do, on the other hand, have to take account of the fact that, at present, medical knowledge doubles every five years. Although that means more costs, everyone has the same entitlement to care, and that is something to which we have to give priority. Hence the need not only for benchmarking, but also for solidarity.
There is no shortage of problems to deal with. The new Member States are still combating corruption in many areas of their health systems. It is where the lack of provision is most glaring that corruption is at its height and older people are poorest, and their poverty is increasing more than elsewhere. Those, in essence, are the social challenges we face. Believe me, older people are most afraid when they believe they will be inadequately cared for when ill or that it will no longer be possible to care for them. It is in the new Member States, as a result of budgetary pressure, that public funding is least secure.
Although I have listed just a few problems, there are others that are becoming apparent; health workers are relocating from the new Member States to the old Fifteen, to the benefit of the healthcare systems there. So let me repeat that this is a sensitive political issue, and improved coordination and cooperation are absolutely vital."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples