Connect with us

Comments

Premiums could “rise significantly” if insurers “recklessly increase” number of doctors on Integrated Shield Plans panels: Life Insurance Association

Published

on

Premiums could “rise significantly” if insurers decide to “recklessly increase” the number of doctors on Integrated Shield Plans (IP) panels, said the Life Insurance Association (LIA) Singapore on Friday (2 Apr).

Increasing panel sizes, said LIA Singapore, should be done “in a careful manner, while paying the doctors reasonable fees”, said an LIA spokesman.

“Insurers agree that we should control our own costs but we don’t really think there’s a lot of fat in our expenses to be cut,” the spokesman added.

Instead of increasing panel sizes, insurers could explore other ways to reduce costs such as by increasing premiums or co-payments or by pre-approving treatments, said LIA Singapore.

LIA Singapore was responding to a position statement on IPs released by the Singapore Medical Association (SMA) almost a week ago, in which SMA lamented the limited number of private specialists on the said panels and the low fees they receive, near the tail end of the fee benchmarks set by the Ministry of Health (MOH).

The medical association claimed that they are faced with higher costs than before due to an increase in management expenses and commission costs for insurers rather than higher claims.

LIA Singapore said this could be the Health Insurance Task Force’s recommendations being implemented, which not only skyrocketed insurers’ expenses in recent years but also had moderated claims growth.

The task force had in 2016 recommended that patients foot a portion of their bills, as well as for panels of approved healthcare providers to be set up and fee benchmarks to be set.

LIA Singapore, however, highlighted issues with the MOH fee benchmarks, stating that doctors are not obligated to follow them and the thresholds are thus not effective enough in guiding prices.

The upper end of fee benchmarks is 1.8 times higher than the lower end. For two per cent of procedures, the highest limit of the fee benchmarks is 4.2 to 6.3 times the lowest bound.

In contrast, doctors on panels sign contracts that compel them to charge within the fee range stipulated in the said contracts.

“Many procedures do not have descriptors for when a doctor should charge towards the upper end and when a doctor should charge towards the lower end,” said LIA Singapore, noting that doctors have considerable discretion in deciding fees.

“Through panels, insurers can help address this by setting a default fee below the upper bound, as well as allowing charges above the default for cases which are more complex than the norm,” it said.

“So long as insurers are fair in allowing deviations, this should be a reasonable way to conduct panels,” LIA Singapore added.

Citing a study it conducted at the end of Nov last year, in which all five insurers have approved claims from doctors that went beyond the fee benchmark but have approved considerably more claims below the lower end of the benchmark, LIA Singapore also noted that setting panel fees at the upper bound of MOH’s benchmarks may result in escalating claims.

SMA claimed that many IP insurers have “highly exclusive” panels, which does not only affect doctors who are not made part of the panels, but also policyholders who seek to choose their doctors more freely.

Some may wish to consult a doctor recommended by a friend or relative, or stick with a familiar doctor who is not on the panel, SMA added.

To this, LIA Singapore said that it would continue to enlarge the pool of doctors included on the IP panels to help policyholders avoid “having to consult non-panel doctors, which incurs higher costs”.

Addressing SMA’s concerns about a lack of transparency in the selection process of doctors on the panels, LIA Singapore said that insurers typically review the prospective panel doctor’s past claims to see if they have been reasonable, whether there are any red flags in terms of volume of suspicious claims, and look if available markers of quality such as re-admission rates are present.

“The process includes looking into doctors’ overall reputation, doctors’ training records and credentials, as well as checks on whether there are any disciplinary issues with the Singapore Medical Council,” said LIA Singapore.

Commenters on TODAY’s and The Straits Times’ Facebook posts on the matter agreed with LIA Singapore that patients “will ultimately bear the cost” with the current system, and that it is a sign that the insurance contract is profit-driven rather than focusing on “providing care for the insured”.

Other commenters said that doctors should not complain about being paid on the lower end of the MOH fee benchmarks.

“If they don’t overcharge they have nothing to fear,” said one commenter.

One commenter opined that “it seems only the government is benefiting from this whole scheme” despite compulsory medical insurance being implemented to address rising healthcare costs.

“Just abolish all private insurers from the scheme. Gov just implement basic scheme up to class B. and who ever wants better treatment just pay the difference in pricing,” said one commenter.

Continue Reading
6 Comments
Subscribe
Notify of
6 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Comments

Dr Chee Soon Juan criticises Ho Ching’s vision for 8-10 million population

SDP chief Dr Chee Soon Juan criticised Ho Ching’s claim that Singapore could support a population of 8 to 10 million through effective city planning. He expressed scepticism, citing adverse effects like rising living costs and mental health issues. Dr Chee argued that smaller populations can thrive, referencing Scandinavian countries that excelled internationally and produced Nobel laureates.

Published

on

Dr Chee Soon Juan, Secretary-General of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), slammed Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s spouse, Ho Ching, for her assertion that Singapore could accommodate 8 to 10 million people with proper city planning and land reclamation.

In a video message published on 1 October, Dr Chee expressed strong scepticism regarding the narrative of increasing the population, highlighting that the current surge past the 6 million mark had been largely driven by the influx of foreigners, which led to several adverse consequences.

He further highlighted that smaller populations were not inherently negative, drawing examples from some Scandinavian countries that had flourished on the international stage despite their smaller populations and had even produced Nobel Prize laureates.

Ho Ching expressed confidence that with proper city planning, Singapore could accommodate up to 8-10 million people

Last Friday (27 September), in a Facebook post, Madam Ho, who was also the former CEO of Temasek Holdings, highlighted the growing demand for caregivers as the population aged and the need for workers to sustain sectors like construction and engineering, particularly as the workforce shrank due to lower birth rates.

“As we have less children, we need more people from elsewhere to join us to keep this city functioning, from repairing train tracks through the night to serving patients in hospitals through the night. ”

Dr Chee Highlights Risks of Population Growth

In response, Dr Chee recalled his experience of being reprimanded by Minister for Foreign Affairs Dr Vivian Balakrishnan during the last General Election for raising concerns about the implications of a rapidly growing population.

He questioned why Madam Ho, who shared similar views, had not faced the same scrutiny.

In his video, Dr Chee articulated several concerns regarding the proposed increase in population, highlighting the potential negative impacts, including increased demand for food, housing, and transportation, which would result in a significant rise in living costs.

With a larger population, Dr Chee pointed out that more flats, roads, hospitals, and public transportation would need to be constructed, which would ultimately require higher taxes and fees to maintain the necessary infrastructure.

The SDP leader emphasized that an influx of residents would intensify competition for jobs, exerting downward pressure on wages and potentially leading to higher rates of unemployment and underemployment.

Dr Chee further expressed concern over the environmental degradation that would accompany population growth, citing the recent clearing of forests for housing and industrial developments, including Tengah and Kranji Forests.

Dr Chee questioned the ability of existing infrastructure to cope with a growing population, referencing the persistent issues with the MRT system, including breakdowns and safety hazards.

He highlighted the toll that congestion and overpopulation take on the mental health of Singaporeans, noting a rise in reported mental health challenges.

“All this while the ministers live in secluded and luxurious bunglows and villas, far from the madding crowd which we are subjected to every single day.”

“So, when Ho Ching says that we can accommodate up to 10 million people, I’d like to ask her, where and what type of house she lives in?”

Dr Chee Argues for Innovative Economic Solutions Over Traditional Urban Expansion

Regarding the ruling government’s persistent push to increase Singapore’s population to what he considered “unhealthy levels,” Dr Chee suggested that the PAP lacked viable alternatives for fostering economic growth.

He implied that the government resorted to traditional methods of expansion, such as construction and urban development.

He highlighted that the government is fixated on physically expanding the city—“digging, pouring concrete, and erecting structures”—to sustain GDP growth.

This approach, he argued, creates an illusion that Singapore remains a productive economic hub, despite potential downsides.

Dr Chee Advocates for the Value of Smaller Populations: Cites Political Freedom as Key to Innovation and Success

Dr Chee further contended that a smaller population did not necessarily hinder a nation’s success.

He cited several Scandinavian countries and Taiwan, emphasising their global brands and innovations despite their relatively small populations.

Dr Chee connected the success of these nations to their political freedoms, arguing that the ability to think and express oneself freely fostered innovation and societal progress.

He contrasted this with Singapore, where he claimed that the government controlled media and stifled freedom of expression.

He criticised the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) for its centralised control and for limiting the potential of Singaporeans. Dr Chee used the metaphor of a “grotesque monkey” clinging to the nation, suggesting that the PAP hindered progress and growth.

Dr Chee emphasised that the quality of a population—its talent, energy, and potential—was far more important than its size.

He suggested that Singapore possessed the necessary attributes to succeed on a global scale but was held back by the current political landscape.

He urged Singaporeans to engage in critical thinking rather than passively accepting government narratives.

Dr Chee advocated for a more mature and sophisticated approach to governance and civic engagement, encouraging citizens to take an active role in shaping their society.

Continue Reading

Comments

Netizens criticise PM Wong’s video, urge Govt to address root causes of cost-of-living crisis

Netizens have voiced concerns over PM Wong’s approach to addressing the cost-of-living crisis. Many argue that distributing CDC vouchers provides only temporary relief and are calling for more substantial action on issues such as transport and rental costs.

Published

on

By

SINGAPORE: In response to Prime Minister Lawrence Wong’s video titled “Tackling Cost of Living Concern,” uploaded on 2 October, netizens expressed that the Singapore government should address fundamental issues like transport and rental costs, rather than relying on measures such as distributing Community Development Council (CDC) vouchers.

In the six-minute video, PM Wong acknowledged that although inflation has moderated, the cost of living remains a significant issue for many Singaporeans.

PM Wong assured Singaporeans that his team is committed to helping them through this challenging period.

He emphasised that while inflation is expected to decline further in 2024, prices will still rise from time to time.

He explained that delaying price adjustments would only worsen the situation in the future, but the government will work on mitigating the impact of any necessary increases.

The prime minister outlined that the long-term solution to managing living costs is to ensure Singaporeans have access to good jobs with better wages.

He added that higher wages should outpace inflation, allowing citizens to improve their living standards in real terms.

PM Wong also provided an economic outlook for 2024, predicting higher growth and lower inflation, which could lead to increases in real incomes for workers.

He noted that the government is closely monitoring economic conditions for 2025 and will reveal more of its plans in the upcoming Budget.

Recapping earlier initiatives, PM Wong said the government has allocated over $10 billion through the Assurance Package to help Singaporeans cope with rising living costs, including enhancements to the package.

He highlighted that this year, every household has received S$800 in CDC vouchers, alongside utility rebates and cash payouts.

PM Wong also touched on global inflation trends, explaining how disruptions from the pandemic and global conflicts affected prices.

He assured Singaporeans that the government has taken measures, such as strengthening the Singapore dollar, to shield them from the worst of these effects.

Netizens criticise government’s approach to rising cost of living

Hundreds of netizens have voiced their concerns under a Facebook post by The Straits Times on PM Wong’s video, criticising the government’s approach to addressing cost-of-living issues.

Many users expressed frustration, noting that despite the government’s repeated reassurances about helping Singaporeans, there has been a lack of action to address the ongoing increases in utility and transport fares.

Others echoed similar sentiments, with one user blaming the increase in GST to 9% as a major factor contributing to the rising cost of living. As Finance Minister, PM Wong was the key advocate of the GST hike and defended it when the opposition called for a deferment.

One netizen criticised the government’s actions as being counterproductive.  They pointed out that while the government raises prices in several areas, it simultaneously claims to be providing help, which they view as contradictory.

Netizens call for action on rising rental costs, criticise reliance on CDC vouchers

Many commenters also criticised the distribution of CDC vouchers as insufficient, urging the government to tackle root issues such as high rental and housing costs.

One netizen argued that CDC vouchers provide little relief, and reducing rental, medical, and food costs would be a more effective solution.

Another user called for standardised rental prices for hawker stalls and suggested that the government should fine landlords who raise rents excessively.

Other commenters focused on the need for more substantial measures, such as controlling hawker stall and coffee shop leases.

They argued that skyrocketing rental prices directly affect consumers through higher food costs.

One user proposed reducing government officials’ salaries and reforming other key policies such as lowering the GST and making housing more affordable as real solutions.

Additionally, some netizens highlighted the need to address transport and rental costs, noting that higher transport and raw material costs will continue to drive up consumer prices.

They urged the government to reduce rent for commercial shops and food stalls.

Netizens call for concrete measures in addressing cost of living

Some netizens expressed doubts about the government’s efforts to address the cost of living, calling for more transparency and concrete actions.

Many have called for clear metrics, such as housing prices, Certificate of Entitlement (COE) prices, transportation costs, and population growth, to be presented as proof of the government’s commitment to tackling these issues.

Other commenters urged the government to avoid short-term solutions such as payouts, which could ultimately lead to higher taxpayer costs.

They suggested more long-term measures, including lowering CPF contribution rates, which they view as a financial burden on lower-income earners.

 

Continue Reading

Trending