National Health Insurance (South Africa)

Last updated

The National Health Insurance Bill is a bill passed by the National Assembly of South Africa on 13 June 2023 and the National Council of Provinces on 6 December 2023. The Bill contemplates the establishment of a South African national health insurance system, commonly referred to as NHI, with the aim of "pooling public revenue in order to actively and strategically purchase health care services" and creating a "single framework throughout the Republic for the public funding and public purchasing of health care services, medicines, health goods and health related products". [1] The purpose of the Bill is to establish and maintain a National Health Insurance Fund that will serve as the "single purchaser and single payer" of health care services. [2]

Contents

Background

The South African healthcare system consists of a public and private sector, both of which are regulated to varying degrees by the Department of Health. The public healthcare system is utilised by approximately 84% of the South African population, and services are provided in accordance with a system of means testing. The private healthcare system services approximately 16% of the population, [3] the majority of whom are members of medical schemes. Medical schemes are voluntary health insurance providers that finance members' access to for-profit hospitals and primary healthcare facilities. This bifurcated system is characterised by inequalities in access to and quality of healthcare services, with the public sector being severely overburdened, under-resourced and mismanaged. [4]

The stated purpose of the NHI Bill is to address these inequalities, as well as to give effect to the obligation resting on the state in terms of section 27 of the Constitution of South Africa to "take reasonable legislative and other measures, within its available resources, to achieve the "progressive realisation" of the "right to have access to health care services".

History

Early initiatives and contextual background

Social health insurance for formally employed persons in South Africa was first contemplated as part of the recommendations of the 1926 Pienaar Commission. [5] These recommendations, whilst not immediately adopted, ultimately resulted in the expansion of the social welfare programme of the South African government throughout the 1930s. The Public Health Department established a Committee of Inquiry into NHI in 1935, which advocated for social insurance for employees in urban areas who earned below a specified threshold, to be provided on a non-racial basis. [4]

The early 1940s saw sustained interest in the development of the South African welfare state, amidst the release of the Beveridge Report in the United Kingdom and calls from medical associations to establish a national health system. [6] A 1944 report by the National Health Services Commission recommended the creation of a needs-based, state-administered health service. [7] Despite the appointment of liberal United Party parliamentarian Henry Gluckman as Minister of Health in 1945, prospects of establishing a national health service waned during the post-war period, particularly following the victory of the National Party in the 1948 general election. [4]

The early healthcare policy of the National Party was characterised by increased regulation of medical schemes and private hospitals, which serviced a majority of white South Africans by 1960, and solidified the role of the state as the primary provider of healthcare services. [4] The call for universal free medical care featured prominently in the 1955 Freedom Charter adopted by the African National Congress, [8] which would later come to power following the abolition of apartheid.

Budgetary constraints and the ascendancy of neoliberal economic policy led to significant deregulation of private healthcare in the 1980s, including the removal of racial restrictions on medical scheme membership. This resulted in rapid expansion of the private healthcare sector, coupled with increasing costs and widespread market fragmentation, which encouraged a proliferation of research and policy proposals on national health insurance that would later influence the policy objectives of the ANC. [4]

Prelude to the introduction of the Bill

The healthcare landscape in the 1990s was characterised by a decrease in the quality of care provided in state hospitals, consolidation of market control in the private sector, and a moderation of the ANC's policy position on healthcare in line with prevailing macroeconomic theory. [4] Despite the governing party's commitment to establishing and legislating for a "single comprehensive, equitable and integrated" national health system in its 1994 "National Health Plan for South Africa", [9] successive committee reports recommended against a nationalised healthcare system. The Health Care Finance Committee of 1994, and the Committee of Inquiry into NHI of 1995, [10] both ultimately recommended the implementation of a social health insurance system to cover contributors and their financial dependants, with a focus on the provision of hospital services. The Social Health Insurance Working Group of 1997 similarly proposed a system that would cover those formal sector employees who were not members of medical schemes. [11]

Recommendations by the Committee of Inquiry into Comprehensive Social Security in South Africa of 2002, [12] and the Ministerial Task Team of 2005, which favoured a more progressive social health insurance system with elements of cross-subsidisation and price controls, were largely overshadowed by the HIV/AIDS epidemic and the Mbeki government's response to the crisis. Despite significant regulatory reform of medical schemes around the turn of the millennium, private sector costs continued to increase, resulting in decreased membership of medical schemes. [4]

The comparatively populist agenda of the Zuma administration included the urgent implementation of a publicly funded and administered system of national health insurance. This policy position featured in the ANC's 2009 election manifesto, and resulted in the establishment of the ANC NHI Task Team and NHI Ministerial Advisory Committee.

Legislative process

A Green Paper, entitled "NHI in South Africa", [13] was gazetted by the Department of Health on 12 August 2011, contemplating the staged rollout of a national health insurance system over a 15-year period, and the implementation of health system strengthening initiatives (HSSIs) at ten specified pilot sites throughout the country from 2012-2017. This was followed by a draft White Paper, entitled "National Health Insurance for South Africa: Toward Universal Health Coverage", [14] released on 11 December 2015, which committed to a "re-organisation of the health care system".

A revised White Paper was published on 30 June 2017, [15] together with a policy paper on NHI Implementation, which set out the mechanisms by which national health insurance would be financed. The proposals put forward by the Department of Health were met with concern from Treasury and the Davis Tax Committee, as well as public criticism, particularly in light of reports of widespread corruption, and failures in the public healthcare sector (evidenced by the Health Standards Compliance Report and Health Ombud's report on the Life Esidimeni scandal), that severely undermined trust in government during this period.

Notwithstanding these circumstances, a draft of the NHI Bill was published for public comment on 21 June 2018, [16] shortly after the election of Cyril Ramaphosa. This was followed by the publication of the NHI Bill on 26 July 2019. The Bill was introduced in the National Assembly on 8 August 2019 and processed by the Portfolio Committee on Health. After a number of months of public hearings, the National Assembly passed the Bill on 13 June 2023, [17] and referred the Bill to the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) for concurrence, as is required under the Constitution in circumstances where a Bill affects the provinces. The Bill was passed by the NCOP on 6 December 2023 and is to be referred to the President for assent.

Provisions of the Bill

Eligibility and registration

In order to access healthcare services purchased by the National Health Insurance Fund, an eligible person would need to register as a user of the Fund at an accredited health care service provider or establishment. [18] These services will be provided to users for "free at the point of care" upon proof that the user is registered with the Fund. [19] South African citizens, permanent residents, refugees, inmates, "certain categories of individual foreigners" and all children will be eligible to receive healthcare services purchased by the Fund. [20]

As a general rule, users must receive services from the provider or establishment at which they are registered. Provision is, however, made in the Bill for the "portability" of health services, and the transfer of users, in circumstances where users are unable to use their designated facilities, or where those facilities are unable to provide the necessary services. The Bill further provides that a user must "first access health care services at a primary health care level" (such as from a clinic or general practitioner), and "adhere to the [prescribed] referral pathways". [21]

Accreditation

The National Health Insurance Fund is established as an "autonomous public entity" [22] tasked with entering into contracts with accredited health care service providers and health establishments, [23] and determining "payment rates" for such providers, establishments and suppliers. In order to be accredited by the Fund, a provider or establishment must be certified by the Office of Health Standards Compliance and registered with a recognised statutory health professional council". Furthermore, the provider or establishment must comply with the specific performance criteria that are set out in the Bill. A "legally binding contract" is to be concluded between the Fund and the provider or establishment for the provision of primary health care services, emergency medical services and/or hospital services. Certain information must be submitted to the Fund in order to be reimbursed for services provided. [24]

Purchase of healthcare services

The purchase of health care services by the Fund will be effected, in the case of accredited and contracted hospitals, through the transfer of funds directly to those hospitals. Funds for the provision of primary health care services will be transferred to Contracting Units for Primary Health Care, [25] which will manage the provision of these services in specified geographical areas. A Contracting Unit will consist of a district hospital, clinics (community health centres), "ward-based outreach teams" and private providers in that area. Contracting Units will monitor the disbursement of funds to providers in the area, and it is contemplated that these units will "facilitate the integration of public and private health care services". [26]

Accredited primary health care providers must be contracted and remunerated by the relevant Contracting Unit. Emergency medical services will be reimbursed by the Fund on a "capped case-based fee basis with adjustments made for case severity, where necessary", [27] and public ambulance services will be reimbursed through the allocation of funds to the provinces. [25] Payments in respect of specialist and hospital services will be "all-inclusive" and "based on the performance" of the provider, establishment or supplier.

The procurement processes in respect of health-related products will be determined by the Office of Health Products Procurement, and will be subject to existing procurement laws and policies. The Bill provides for the development and maintenance of a formulary, comprising an Essential Medicine List, Essential Equipment List, and list of approved health-related products, according to which procurement must be conducted. [28]

Advisory Committees

Three principal advisory committees of the Fund are to be established by the Minister of Health. The Benefits Advisory Committee will determine the health care service benefits that will be provided and reimbursed by the Fund, and develop treatment guidelines for implementation at primary health care facilities and hospitals. [29] The Health Care Benefits Pricing Committee will recommend the prices of health service benefits to the Fund. [30] The Stakeholder Advisory Committee will comprise representatives from various health professions councils provided for in terms of South African law, as well as interested persons from civil society and labour unions. [31]

Funding and implementation

The primary source of the revenue of the Fund will be monies appropriated annually by Parliament. This will be derived from general tax revenue, the reallocation of funding for medical scheme tax credits, payroll tax and a surcharge on personal income tax. These measures are to be introduced through a money bill in accordance with the process prescribed in the Constitution. [32]

The Bill contemplates that National Health Insurance would be "gradually phased in using a progressive and programmatic approach based on financial resource availability". The first phase would entail, among other things, the establishment of the Fund, structuring of Contracting Units, development of an accreditation process for providers and establishments, amendment of relevant legislation, and purchasing health care service benefits from contracted public and private providers. [26] The second phase would entail the "establishment and operationalisation of the Fund as a purchaser of health care services". [28]

Several pieces of existing legislation would need to be repealed or amended should the Bill be enacted, [33] and the provisions of the Bill would prevail in the event of a conflict between those provisions and the provisions of most other pieces of legislation. [34] The role of medical schemes would be greatly diminished subsequent to the enactment of the Bill, as these entities would only be permitted to offer "complementary cover" for "services not reimbursable by the Fund". [35]

Reaction

The introduction of the NHI Bill has elicited mixed responses from political parties, industry stakeholders and the public at large. A 2019 survey conducted by the Solidarity Research Institute revealed considerable reservations amongst healthcare workers regarding the capacity of the Department of Health to implement and manage a national health insurance scheme. Similar concerns were raised in a 2020 report by the Institute of Risk Management in South Africa, and the submissions made to the Department of Health by several civil society groups following the publication of the draft NHI Bill in 2018. These groups included the Helen Suzman Foundation, Section27 and the People's Health Movement. Legislative reform has been widely regarded by academics as an inadequate intervention to address the deficiencies in the South African healthcare system, which include mismanagement, failing infrastructure and staffing shortages. [3]

A petition against the NHI Bill by the South African Medical Association, which has garnered approximately 78,000 signatures as of October 2023, has been supported by the official opposition Democratic Alliance. [36] In addition to the DA, the Economic Freedom Fighters, African Christian Democratic Party and Inkatha Freedom Party have criticised the Bill. [37] The passage of the Bill was welcomed by the Congress of South African Trade Unions, [38] and described as a "catalyst for universal health access" by the national spokesperson of the governing ANC. [37]

Pharmaceutical industry stakeholders have foreshadowed potential legal challenges to the Bill, which could forestall its implementation. [39] The CEO of Business Leadership South Africa has criticised the Bill's cost implications, as well as the absence of provisions facilitating public-private partnerships. [40] The CEO of Discovery Health, Adrian Gore, raised similar concerns, and has advocated for amendments to the Bill to provide for private-sector collaboration. [41] Business Unity SA and Business for SA released a joint statement outlining the potential tax implications of the NHI Bill, based on an impact analysis conducted by FTI Consulting. [42]

Support for the implementation of NHI is generally higher amongst users of public healthcare services, as opposed to private sector users who are members of medical schemes. In a 2013 study, support for such implementation amongst the former group was 79.2%, compared to 48.9% amongst the latter group. The proportion of respondents who indicated that they had access to information on the NHI Bill was, however, low at 20.4%. [43]

Related Research Articles

Health care reform is for the most part governmental policy that affects health care delivery in a given place. Health care reform typically attempts to:

Health insurance or medical insurance is a type of insurance that covers the whole or a part of the risk of a person incurring medical expenses. As with other types of insurance, risk is shared among many individuals. By estimating the overall risk of health risk and health system expenses over the risk pool, an insurer can develop a routine finance structure, such as a monthly premium or payroll tax, to provide the money to pay for the health care benefits specified in the insurance agreement. The benefit is administered by a central organization, such as a government agency, private business, or not-for-profit entity.

Single-payer healthcare is a type of universal healthcare in which the costs of essential healthcare for all residents are covered by a single public system.

National health insurance (NHI), sometimes called statutory health insurance (SHI), is a system of health insurance that insures a national population against the costs of health care. It may be administered by the public sector, the private sector, or a combination of both. Funding mechanisms vary with the particular program and country. National or statutory health insurance does not equate to government-run or government-financed health care, but is usually established by national legislation. In some countries, such as Australia's Medicare system, the UK's National Health Service and South Korea's National Health Insurance Service, contributions to the system are made via general taxation and therefore are not optional even though use of the health system it finances is. In practice, most people paying for NHI will join it. Where an NHI involves a choice of multiple insurance funds, the rates of contributions may vary and the person has to choose which insurance fund to belong to.

Healthcare in England is mainly provided by the National Health Service (NHS), a public body that provides healthcare to all permanent residents in England, that is free at the point of use. The body is one of four forming the UK National Health Service as health is a devolved matter; there are differences with the provisions for healthcare elsewhere in the United Kingdom, and in England it is overseen by NHS England. Though the public system dominates healthcare provision in England, private health care and a wide variety of alternative and complementary treatments are available for those willing and able to pay.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Healthcare in Singapore</span> Healthcare in Singapore

Healthcare in Singapore is under the purview of the Ministry of Health of the Government of Singapore. It mainly consists of a government-run publicly funded universal healthcare system as well as a significant private healthcare sector. Financing of healthcare costs is done through a mixture of direct government subsidies, compulsory comprehensive savings, national healthcare insurance, and cost-sharing.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Healthcare in Taiwan</span>

Healthcare in Taiwan is administered by the Ministry of Health and Welfare of the Executive Yuan. As with other developed economies, Taiwanese people are well-nourished but face such health problems as chronic obesity and heart disease. In 2002 Taiwan had nearly 1.6 physicians and 5.9 hospital beds per 1,000 population. In 2002, there were 36 hospitals and 2,601 clinics in the country. Per capita health expenditures totaled US$752 in 2000. Health expenditures constituted 5.8 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP) in 2001 ; 64.9 percent of the expenditures were from public funds. Overall life expectancy in 2019 was averaged at 81 years.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Healthcare in Ethiopia</span> Overview of Ethiopian healthcare

As literacy and socioeconomic status improves in Ethiopia, the demand for quality service is also increasing. Besides, changes in the demographic trends, epidemiology and mushrooming urbanization require more comprehensive services covering a wide range and quality of curative, promotive and preventive services.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Healthcare in South Korea</span>

Healthcare in South Korea is universal, although a significant portion of healthcare is privately funded. South Korea's healthcare system is based on the National Health Insurance Service, a public health insurance program run by the Ministry of Health and Welfare to which South Koreans of sufficient income must pay contributions in order to insure themselves and their dependants, and the Medical Aid Program, a social welfare program run by the central government and local governments to insure those unable to pay National Health Insurance contributions. In 2015, South Korea ranked first in the OECD for healthcare access. Satisfaction of healthcare has been consistently among the highest in the world – South Korea was rated as the second most efficient healthcare system by Bloomberg. Health insurance in South Korea is single-payer system. The introduction of health insurance resulted in a significant surge in the utilization of healthcare services. Healthcare providers are overburdened by low reimbursement rates.

Healthcare in Finland consists of a highly decentralized three-level publicly funded healthcare system and a much smaller private sector. Although the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health has the highest decision-making authority, specific healthcare precincts are responsible for providing healthcare to their residents as of 2023.

Hong Kong's medical infrastructure consists of a mixed medical economy, with 12 private hospitals and 43 public hospitals. Hong Kong has high standards of medical practice. It has contributed to the development of liver transplantation, being the first in the world to carry out an adult to adult live donor liver transplant in 1993. Both public and private hospitals in Hong Kong have partnered with the Australian Council on Healthcare Standards (ACHS) for international healthcare accreditation. There are also polyclinics that offer primary care services, including dentistry.

In South Africa, private and public health systems exist in parallel. The public system serves the vast majority of the population. Authority and service delivery are divided between the national Department of Health, provincial health departments, and municipal health departments.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Healthcare in Ghana</span>

Healthcare in Ghana is mostly provided by the national government, and less than 5% of GDP is spent on healthcare. The healthcare system still has challenges with access, especially in rural areas not near hospitals.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Healthcare in Tanzania</span>

Tanzania has a hierarchical health system which is in tandem with the political-administrative hierarchy. At the bottom, there are the dispensaries found in every village where the village leaders have a direct influence on its running. The health centers are found at ward level and the health center in charge is answerable to the ward leaders. At the district, there is a district hospital and at the regional level a regional referral hospital. The tertiary level is usually the zone hospitals and at a national level, there is the national hospital. There are also some specialized hospitals that do not fit directly into this hierarchy and therefore are directly linked to the ministry of health.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Healthcare in Portugal</span>

Healthcare in Portugal is provided through three coexisting systems: the National Health Service, special social health insurance schemes for certain professions and voluntary private health insurance. The SNS provides universal coverage, although in 2012 measures were implemented to ensure the sustainability of the service by the introduction of user fees to be paid for at the end of treatments. In addition, about 25% of the population is covered by the health subsystems, 10% by private insurance schemes and another 7% by mutual funds. The Ministry of Health is responsible for developing health policy as well as managing the SNS. The Health Regulatory Entity (ERS) is the public independent entity responsible for the regulation of the activity of all the public, private and social healthcare providers. In 2019 the government proposes to scrap all fees, which constitute about 2 percent of the NHS's budget, apart from some hospital emergencies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">National Health Insurance Scheme (Ghana)</span> National Health Insurance of Ghana

The National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) is the publicly funded healthcare systems established by the Government of Ghana in 2003. The program was a form of national health insurance established to provide equitable access and financial coverage for basic health care services to Ghanaian citizens. Ghana's universal healthcare system has been described as the most successful healthcare system on the African continent by business magnate Bill Gates. The system has been found to have made Ghana's rate of health insurance one of the highest in Africa, though funding problems may complicate its future.

Examples of health care systems of the world, sorted by continent, are as follows.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Healthcare in Belize</span>

Healthcare in Belize is provided through both public and private healthcare systems. The Ministry of Health (MoH) is the government agency responsible for overseeing the entire health sector and is also the largest provider of public health services in Belize. The MoH offers affordable care to a majority of Belizeans with a strong focus on providing quality healthcare through a range of public programs and institutions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Healthcare in the British Virgin Islands</span>

Healthcare in the British Virgin Islands is predominantly provided by private healthcare providers with an overlay of public support. There is a single public hospital in the British Virgin Islands - Peebles Hospital in Road Town on Tortola. There is also one private hospital - the Bougainvillea clinic. On Anegada, Virgin Gorda and Jost Van Dyke, there are day clinics to serve non-emergency medical needs of residents of those islands. Although there is periodic discussion about the possibility of building another hospital on Virgin Gorda, to date there has been no commitment to doing so. For emergency medical evacuations from other islands a boat is maintained.

References

  1. ↑ Preamble to the National Health Insurance Bill of 2019 (PDF). National Assembly.
  2. ↑ Section 2 of the NHI Bill.
  3. 1 2 Pauw, TL (2022). "Catching up with the constitution: An analysis of National Health Insurance in South Africa post-apartheid". Development South Africa. 39 (6): 923. doi: 10.1080/0376835X.2021.1945911 . S2CID   237762121.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Whyle, EB; Olivier, J (2022). "A socio-political history of the South African National Health Insurance" (PDF). Research Square.
  5. ↑ J Seekings (2006). 'Not a Single White Person Should Be Allowed to Go Under': Swartgevaar and the Origins of South Africa's Welfare State, 1924-1929 (Report). Centre for Social Science Research. p. 4.
  6. ↑ Digby, A (1989). "'Vision and Vested Interests': National Health Service Reform in South Africa and Britain during the 1940s and Beyond". Social History of Medicine. 21 (3): 485–502. doi:10.1093/shm/hkn061.
  7. ↑ Price, M (1989). "Explaining trends in the privatization of health services in South Africa". Health Policy and Planning. 4 (2): 121–130. doi:10.1093/heapol/4.2.121. JSTOR   45089996.
  8. ↑ "The Freedom Charter". African National Congress.
  9. ↑ "A National Health Plan for South Africa". African National Congress. 30 May 1994.
  10. ↑ Committee of Inquiry into NHI Report (PDF) (Report). Committee of Inquiry into NHI.
  11. ↑ McIntyre, D; Van den Heever, A (2007). "Social or National Health Insurance". In S Harrison; R Bhana; A Ntuli (eds.). South African Health Review. Health Systems Trust. pp. 71–87.
  12. ↑ Transforming the Present: Protecting the Future (PDF) (Report). Committee of Inquiry into Comprehensive Social Security in South Africa of 2002.
  13. ↑ NHI in South Africa (PDF) (Report). National Department of Health.
  14. ↑ National Health Insurance for South Africa: Toward Universal Health Coverage (PDF) (Report). National Department of Health.
  15. ↑ National Health Insurance Policy: Towards universal health coverage (Report). National Department of Health.
  16. ↑ National Health Insurance Bill, 2018 (PDF) (Report). National Department of Health.
  17. ↑ Makoni, Munyaradzi (24 June 2023). "South Africa passes National Health Insurance Bill". The Lancet.
  18. ↑ Sections 4 and 5 of the NHI Bill.
  19. ↑ Section 8.
  20. ↑ Section 4.
  21. ↑ Section 7.
  22. ↑ Section 9.
  23. ↑ Section 10.
  24. ↑ Section 39.
  25. 1 2 Section 35.
  26. 1 2 Section 37.
  27. ↑ Section 41.
  28. 1 2 Section 38.
  29. ↑ Section 25.
  30. ↑ Section 26.
  31. ↑ Section 27.
  32. ↑ Section 49.
  33. ↑ Section 58.
  34. ↑ Section 3.
  35. ↑ Section 33.
  36. ↑ "DA supports SAMA's fight against NHI". da.org.za. African National Congress. Retrieved 3 November 2023.
  37. 1 2 Khumalo, Junior (14 June 2023). "'A catastrophic development': Opposition parties slam Parliament's passing of controversial NHI Bill". news24.
  38. ↑ Nkanjeni, Unathi (15 June 2023). "'It's time all South Africans are afforded the right to healthcare': Cosatu welcomes passing of NHI Bill". news24.
  39. ↑ Chironda, Melody (23 October 2023). "South Africa: National Health Insurance Plan Expected to Face Legal Challenges". allAfrica.
  40. ↑ Burger, Schalk (5 June 2023). "Current format of NHI will be expensive, without the promise of improved quality of care – BLSA". Creamer Media's Engineering News.
  41. ↑ Fraser, Luke (20 October 2023). "The NHI could work in South Africa – but not like this". Business Tech.
  42. ↑ Hamilton, Katja (30 August 2023). "Proposed tax hikes intensify NHI funding worries". Biz Community.
  43. ↑ Booysen, Frederik; Hongoro, Charles (2018). "Perceptions of and support for national health insurance in South Africa's public and private healthcare sectors". Pan African Medical Journal. 30: 277. doi:10.11604/pamj.2018.30.277.14147. PMC   6317390 . PMID   30637062.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.