‘EXTENDING NHS charging for migrants will create a discriminatory two-tier health system and increase costs,’ the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants (JCWI) warned in response to the Queen’s Speech on Wednesday.
The JCWI warned:
• New proposals to extend charging to GP services, emergency care, ambulances etc. are unworkable and will have a significant impact on minorities and vulnerable groups in the UK.
• Individuals, even those entitled to do so, will be deterred from accessing the health service, as it will frequently be impossible to know at the outset whether or not you will face a fee. This creates an individual and a public health hazard.
• The health service is overstretched as it is. Staff simply cannot take on the hugely complex burden of checking immigration status, without incurring significant costs that are unlikely to be recovered.
• Many migrants already pay an Immigration Health Surcharge to cover the costs of their NHS care.
Chai Patel, Legal & Policy Director of the JCWI, said: ‘This is now the second time in a few years that the Government has attempted to extend charging to primary care and A&E. The proposals were discriminatory, costly and unworkable then and they remain so now. We cannot have people in the UK reluctant to call 999 because they might be charged for it.
‘The current system already does recover money from migrants through the Immigration Health Surcharge, which, although controversial, is cheap and simple to administer through the visa system. In contrast these proposals will involve emergency care staff, GP surgeries, and others having to negotiate extremely complex immigration status determinations, and exemptions, while attempting to deliver a health service.
‘It will also, inevitably result in discrimination against ethnic minorities in the UK who are far more likely to be wrongly denied treatment, or forced to jump through additional hoops because they look or sound foreign.’
Plans by the government announced in the Queen’s Speech to introduce a new law against non-violent extremism represent a direct attack on civil liberties and Britain’s Muslim communities, warned the Islamic Human Rights Commission (IHRC).
The Counter-Extremism and Safeguarding Bill envisages introducing a new civil order regime such as ASBOs to restrict so-called extremist activity. However, it is reported that the bill is still far from ready to be introduced to Parliament because the government is struggling to come up with a legally robust definition of extremism that will withstand the first legal challenge on freedom of speech grounds from those it seeks to ban.
Currently the government defines extremism as ‘the vocal or active opposition to our fundamental values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and the mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs’.
It is so wide that it is capable of ensnaring terrorist sympathisers but also those who oppose the government or hold conservative views such as or disapproval of abortion or same-sex marriage.
The difficulty experienced by the government in drawing up a watertight definition highlights the obvious dangers of criminalising what people think and say, particularly in relation to what it calls non-violent extremism. All kinds of illiberal views could be deemed extremist. To prosecute those holding them is clearly interfering with their right to freedom of belief and speech.
The bill also proposes introducing new powers of intervention to tackle the so-called radicalisation of children in ‘unregulated education settings’. This effectively means government oversight of the Muslim religious education sector dominated by after-school madrasas. Quite how the madrasa sector is breeding extremists has never been shown but the government seems intent on reining in their independence regardless.
IHRC chair Massoud Shadjareh said: ‘The government cannot use the pretext of protecting our British way of life by bringing in legislation that actually undermines British values such as freedom of belief and expression in an unprecedented manner.
‘The civil penalties being proposed also undermine the rule of law. If someone is suspected of committing a crime they should be dealt with according to the law, not channelled down a track that bypasses due process.’
Teachers and parents will be deeply disappointed that the government has ignored the interests of children and plans to create more chaos in education, said Mary Bousted, general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers (ATL).
Responding to the Queen’s speech, Mary Bousted said: ‘Once again the government is not acting in the best interests of children. Pushing ahead with its plans to make all schools into academies will cause more chaos for children and schools at a time when the government should be focussing on the priorities – a school place for every child and a qualified teacher for every class.
‘The government needs to get a grip and sort out the teacher shortage crisis, school places crisis and the increase in child mental health issues all of which are more important than reorganising who runs schools.’
The University and College Union (UCU) general secretary, Sally Hunt, said: ‘We will be looking at the detail of the proposed legislation, especially the first higher education legislation in over a decade. We are disappointed that the government is continuing on a clear course to privatise higher education despite the very real danger which this poses to our sector’s international reputation.
‘We are convinced that the best way to improve education quality at all levels is to listen to the concerns of teaching staff, and focus on ensuring a professional and well-rewarded workforce.’
Government cuts have led to the crisis in prisons that ministers now claim need fixing, the Public and Commercial Services union said in response to the Queen’s Speech. The union, which represents prison administrative staff, managers and instructional officers, is concerned plans for academy-style prisons would lead to the break-up of a national prison service and have a detrimental effect on offenders, staff and rehabilitation.
In common with the rest of the public sector, the prison service has faced huge cuts in budgets and staff since 2010. Combined with a closure programme introduced when the prison population was rising, the union fears institutions are no longer safe.
In a typical week there is at least one suicide, 600 incidents of self-harm and 350 assaults, including 90 on staff. In 2015, there was the highest-ever number of murders in prisons. PCS general secretary Mark Serwotka said: ‘We do not believe that simply handing more control to governors will solve these very serious issues that are being exacerbated by cuts.
‘Staff shortages, overcrowding and the rise in violent incidents all need to be addressed with proper resources and with prisons remaining in the public sector under national standards.’
The Royal College of Nursing criticised the Queen’s Speech announcements on the delivery of NHS services over seven days of the week, and legislation to charge overseas visitors and migrants for use of the NHS.
Janet Davies, Chief Executive & General Secretary of the RCN said: ‘There is still a lack of clarity over what the delivery of seven-day services across the NHS will involve. The Government needs to demonstrate how it will sufficiently and sustainably provide the resources required to provide seven-day services without compromising safe staffing and patient care. So far it has failed to do so.
‘The extension of plans to charge migrants for NHS services will have practical implications for already stretched frontline NHS staff. The first priority of NHS staff is to provide patients with first class care, and this must not be compromised by an expectation that they will be evaluating their patients’ eligibility for free care.
‘Many nurses from overseas are working for and contributing towards the NHS. It is simply unfair to expect them to be charged for NHS services.’
