Ministers given a "full-blown, massive nose-bleed" in key health cash vote

Thursday 15 December 2022

Jersey's Ministers have been told to "stop whingeing and, in the words of the Duke of Edinburgh, just get on with it," in a key debate over "plundering" a fund set up to help Islanders with the cost of visiting their GP.

During the second day of the debate into the 2023-26 Government Plan, the Assembly voted convincingly to support a Scrutiny amendment re-writing the way healthcare will be paid for.

The decision came in spite of dire warnings from Ministers, who had earlier seen the compromise proposals they had put forward shot down by a similarly large margin.

Proposing the fourth amendment on behalf of the Health and Social Scrutiny Panel, Deputy Geoff Southern said there had been a series of instances over the past 12 years when ministers had been allowed to transfer money from the Health Insurance Fund.

The aim, he said, was "...to prevent the Social Security and Health Ministers from raiding the Health Insurance Fund and using it for whatever project they see fit."

Deputy Southern said the fund had been set up to support the delivery of primary care, but was now being used to finance IT projects in the secondary care sector. He said government proposals would see the value of the fund fall from £92 million in 2022 to £48m in 2025, leaving the fund "living on a knife-edge."

Another member of the panel, Deputy Philip Bailhache compared Ministers' conduct to a little boy caught stealing sweets in a confectionery shop, hitting out at what he described as "a lack of principle."

"Ministers should be ashamed of this attempt to continue the plundering of the Health Insurance Fund," he said. "They come out with weasel words about protecting the fund, but you don't do that by robbing Peter to pay Paul."

Deputy Bailhache said the fund should be increased, not reduced, with the aim of doing something about the "lamentable' state of dental care, which he described as "deplorable in a wealthy society."

Ministerial "scrambling' to divert money from different pots was evidence of a government in financial crisis," according to Deputy Montfort Tadier, who likened the approach to someone buying drinks for everyone in the pub one day, then rising their child's piggy bank the next day in order to buy food for the family.

Several members of the government referred to the need to tackle financial challenges they had inherited from their predecessors.

Chief Minister Kristina Moore said the compromise being suggested by ministers was a "pragmatic" solution.

"We have a tanker to turn around, and turn it round we will, but it will take time," she said.

Health Minister Karen Wilson said Ministers were seeking to find a "balanced solution" and that she was concerned that the Scrutiny proposals would lead to some services having to be switched off.

But there was a split within the Council of Ministers, with Infrastructure Tom Binet telling the Assembly that he had advised his colleagues that he could not support their proposals relating to the Health Insurance Fund.

After the ministerial compromise proposals were defeated by 29 votes to 16, with one abstention, Treasury Minister Ian Gorst said that the Scrutiny amendment would see the £29m General Reserve Fund reduced by £12m, warning that there would be consequences to this decision.

Some health-related projects might have to be reconsidered, Deputy Gorst said, including proposed investment of £5m in reducing hospital waiting lists, £2.5m in funding for improved parental leave and a further £3m for projects identified in ministers' 100-day priority list.

Deputy Moore referred to the earlier vote as "not just a bloody nose, but a full-blown, massive nose-bleed" that would affect the government's ability to meet its promises to provide help for those who most needed it.

But Deputy Bailhache said ministers should "stop whingeing and, in the words of the Duke of Edinburgh, just get on with it."

The Scrutiny amendment was passed by 31 votes to 13.