We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: National Health Service Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Labour Party
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: November 2191
Description[?]:
| Healthcare should be available for all and be available free on the point of delivery. It should not be undermined by business - profit has no place in healthcare. This Act will ensure free, quality, healthcare for all Pontesians irrespective of their means. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Health care policy.
Old value:: Health care is private, but is paid for by the state for people with low incomes.
Current: There is a free public health care system and a small number of private clinics, which are heavily regulated to ensure they treat their patients well and provide good care.
Proposed: There is a free public health care system and a small number of private clinics, which are heavily regulated to ensure they treat their patients well and provide good care.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Pharmaceutical drugs policy.
Old value:: The government does not subsidise the cost of pharmaceutical drugs at all.
Current: The government pays partially for all citizens' pharmaceutical drugs, and pays entirely for those of low income citizens.
Proposed: The government pays for all citizens' pharmaceutical drugs.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 19:22:53, February 23, 2006 CET | From |  One Nation Conservative Party | To | Debating the National Health Service Act |
| Message | This is not feasible as the current budget would not accomodate such a large increase in public spending. |
| Date | 21:57:04, February 23, 2006 CET | From | Georgeonian Centrist Party | To | Debating the National Health Service Act |
| Message | The GCP would support this proposal even if it requires an increase in taxes. |
| Date | 00:58:58, February 24, 2006 CET | From |  Pnték Znkak Prta 'Bastardry' | To | Debating the National Health Service Act |
| Message | The Bastards see the ONCP and see logistical sense. |
| Date | 16:51:07, February 24, 2006 CET | From | Labour Party | To | Debating the National Health Service Act |
| Message | Not enough money isn't really an arguement against this bill becuase taxes can be increased to pay for it. However that isn't what this bill is about, such concerns are for the Minister of Finance. This bill is about whether or not all Pontesians should have access to healthcare. |
| Date | 18:31:12, February 24, 2006 CET | From | Pontesi Fascist Coalition | To | Debating the National Health Service Act |
| Message | Higher taxes will constrain economic growth, and this entire bill will create an unnecessary government bureaucracy. |
| Date | 18:39:13, February 24, 2006 CET | From | Labour Party | To | Debating the National Health Service Act |
| Message | Higher taxes don't neccesarily constrain growth, not will a national health service create an "unnecessary government bureaucracy" - it will create healthcare for everyone. Simply because the state does something it does not make it inherently unnecessarily bureaucratic, and just becuase the private sector does something it does not make it better. Healthcare for all is not something I would describe as "unnecessary". |
| Date | 14:13:26, February 25, 2006 CET | From | Friedrich Hayek Party | To | Debating the National Health Service Act |
| Message | Higher taxes to contstrain growth as people keep less of their money, so spend less and invest less, hence the economy grows less and is constrained. Simple economics Once again we ask, if private companies have to compete with a free public health service? Why regulate them? They will be inherently better than the public service because they have to compete with a free service and the only way people will go to a private service is if it is better than the free one. Thus no need to regulate. Simple logic, we hope the labour party can understand it instead of demonising capitalism and businesses as evil |
| Date | 14:15:22, February 25, 2006 CET | From | Labour Party | To | Debating the National Health Service Act |
| Message | We are putting this to the vote alongside the compromise in the hope that it has enough support to pass. FHP I doubt you and I will ever agree, but I wasn't "demonising" capitalism and business but rather removing ideas of profit from healthcare and ensuring quality healthcare for all, free on the point of delivery. Business has it's place, just not in healthcare. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 70 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 213 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: If there are no parties in your nation with seats, feel free to visit the forum and request an early election on the Early Election Requests thread: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4362 |
| Random quote: "Benefits should be conferred gradually; and in that way they will taste better." - Niccolo Machiavelli |