Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Palmer (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Monday, 26 June 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Health Bill.


Health Bill

moved Amendment No. 45:"After Clause 75, insert the following new clause—" ““TAX RELIEF ON PREMIUMS FOR MEDICAL INSURANCE (1)   Where an individual makes a payment in respect of a premium under a contract of private medical insurance, it shall be deducted from or set off against his income for the year of assessment in which it is made for the purposes of calculating his liability to income tax. (2)   In this section— (a)   a premium, in relation to a contract of insurance, is any amount payable under the contract to the insurer, (b)   a contract is a contract of private medical insurance where— (i)   it either provides indemnity in respect of all or any of the costs of all or any of the treatments, medical services and other matters for the time being specified in regulations made by the Secretary of State, or in addition to providing indemnity of that description provides cash benefits falling within rules for the time being so specified, (ii)   it does not confer any right other than such a right as is mentioned in sub-paragraph (i) above, and (iii)   the premium under the contract is reasonable.”” The noble Lord said: My Lords, I accept that this amendment is perhaps a little more controversial. The madness behind this thinking is that if more people were able to take out private medical insurance, this would in theory reduce the waiting lists in the National Health Service. I know from my own experience, despite the fact that I have mega claims every year—or, at least, I have done in the past—that my private medical insurance is one of the highest expenditures I have in the whole year. One must not forget that the general public spent nearly £7 billion on private healthcare in 2003, which was literally four times less than it was 10 years ago. I accept that this is controversial and, of course, a Treasury matter—I dare say the Minister will not be able to give me much joy—but, none the less, I thought it was worth airing because I am sure that at the end of the day it would reduce the time that people have to wait for care under the National Health Service. I beg to move.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
683 c1057-8 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disclosure of information Data protection Codes of practice Costs Delegated legislation Disqualification Health hazards Drugs Health professions Health insurance Labelling Licensed premises NHS Patients Qualifications Powers of entry Personal records Public appointments Public places Pharmacy Ophthalmic services Prices Prescriptions Standards Safety Tax allowances Technology Smoking
Legislation
Health Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk