Last week the High Court began hearing UNISON’s legal challenge, inthe form of a judicial review, to the independent regulatory body for NHS Foundation Trusts, Monitor.
It is the union’s case that Monitor has failed to produce accurate guidelines on what Foundation Trust Hospitals need to declare on income derived from providing services to private patients. This has allowed Foundation Trust Hospitals to extend the proportion of income earned from these patients beyond that intended by law.
At the High Court the Department of Health raised concerns that Monitor’s definition of the private patient income cap “permits foundations and their advisers to adopt artificial structures to circumvent the cap”. The Health Service Journal reports that the ongoing hearing centres onthe meaning of the 2006 Health Act, which set a limit on the proportion of their income foundation trusts could earn from private patients. http://www.hsj.co.uk/news/legal/court-hears-private-patient-cap-arguments/5008116.article
The health care ‘market analysts’ Laing and Buisson report that a full review of the private patient cap is being fast-tracked by the government in a bid to end the ongoing argument over how much foundation trusts can earn from treating private patients. Foundation Trusts are lobbying hard for a relaxation of the cap.
Health Minister Mike O’Brien is reported as saying that a solution and a degree of consensus would not be an easy task given that opinions about how the cap should be reformed are ‘very divided’.
He told MPs: ‘We need to add to the equation the question of the purpose of such private income. Is it for the benefit of the NHS and wider health care, or does it just bring in some extra money which some boards may well feel it would be nice to have? We must have a clear view about that. Aspart of the review, I am seeking to flag up the fact that private patient income must be used for a purpose. I do not want it to be along review – it should be fairly brisk so that in the Spring we can come out with a clear view of the outcome of this debate.’
http://www.healthcaremarketnews.co.uk/DET_news.asp?IssueID=6
Karen Jennings, UNISON Head of Health, said when launching the union's judicial review: “many MPs across the political spectrum had severe reservations about voting Foundation Trusts into existence and the Bill only just scraped through with 17 votes. The safety net of a cap on the income derived from the treatment of private patients was, for many, the decider on which way to vote. The cap was put there to ensure that NHS patients were not pushed to the back of the queue and seen as the poor relations to paying patients. Despite the changes made last year, UNISON believes that Monitor’s interpretation of the guidelines is still wrong. As more NHS Organisations, AmbulanceTrusts, PCTs etc. take on the status of Foundation Trusts we need to ensure that there is no room for error and the judicial review will accomplish that.”
http://www.unison.org.uk/asppresspack/pressrelease_view.asp?id=1333
