Full text PDF - International Policy Network

South Africa’s healthcare under threat 61Implementing the above measures would relieve government ofthe burden of providing health care and would enable it to put substantialfinancial resources directly in the hands of those who needthem most. The essence of the reform programme would be tomaximise the role of the private health sector and for governmentto relieve itself of the liability of providing health care.The main beneficiaries of such a reform programme would be thepoor, who would be given a wide range of health-care choices.Benefits to the taxpayers would be a more efficient use of taxpayerfunds and certainty that tax monies earmarked for funding healthcare for the poor reaches them directly so that poor South Africanswould get more and better health care for the same or less money.State assistance to those who should be self-supporting would beeliminated, allowing greater assistance to those who really need it.A further benefit is that over time, those people who prosper sufficientlyto take care of their own health care would be removed fromthe health-care support list.The government would have responsibility for a thriving,growing, health-care sector that would be the envy of the developingand the developed world. Health professionals would startreturning to South Africa instead of leaving it.ConclusionGovernment’s policy and discussion documents do not explain howSouth Africa, a relatively poor country, will succeed in providingequitable health care to all through the envisaged national healthsystem, when wealthy countries have failed in their attempts to dothis.If government’s health-care plans continue in the direction ofnationalisation, which appears to be the ultimate goal, SouthAfricans will lose their world-class private health-care firms.Patients will lose the freedom to choose their own health care,which is such a vital and personal service, and bureaucratic healthcareplanners will be making decisions for them. This happens in