Former Health Minister raises concerns over prescription plan
By ALISON LOWE
Tribune Staff Reporter
alowe@tribunemedia.net:
FORMER Health Minister Dr Bernard Nottage expressed concern yesterday that despite seeking to expand access to medications, the National Prescription Drug Plan may fail to address the long-standing problem of certain drugs being unavailable at community clinics for those who need them.
Dr Nottage told Parliament he believes Bahamians are on a "collision course with premature death" as a consequence of the high prevalence of chronic non-communicable diseases (CNCDs) like diabetes, hypertension and heart disease that are often preventable through lifestyle and dietary changes. Sixty per cent of deaths in The Bahamas are said to be CNCD-related at present.
The MP's comments came after Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham, in his contribution to Parliament on the NPDP regulations as Minister responsible for the National Insurance Board, said he believes many Bahamians die unnecessarily because of lack of access to medications for chronic non-communicable diseases.
The NPDP is intended to, in its first phase, make medications for 11 CNCDs available free of cost to certain categories of Bahamians, including those over 65, NIB-registered invalids, children under 18 years of age and up to 25 years of age if still in full time education.
Mr Ingraham said: "I'm no doctor but I honestly suspect that many people who are required to take medication like high blood pressure pills or diabetes etcetera end up dying because they don't have it. They don't have the means to get it or a public health facility was out of it."
"It is my hope and expectation that (as a result of the implementation of the drug plan on August 1) people of any constituency will no longer have to go to the clinic to find out there there's no diabetes pills or high blood pressure pills. That everybody will have their supply, and that they will pick it up and take it."
The Prime Minister explained during his contribution how 11 private pharmacy companies with 16 locations have at present been voluntarily contracted to dispense the medication free-of-cost to patients on behalf of the Government, and in places where such private pharmacies do not exist, such as in many family islands, public clinics will play this role.
He admitted that governments "have not done a good job all of these years" of ensuring the necessary medications required by local populations have been available in some of the family island clinics.
"Even if we have to contract services outside of National Insurance, we have to make sure that all of these clinics have medications," said Mr Ingraham.
Dr Nottage said this is an area that will "require a lot of attention" if the NPDP is to work successfully.
"Will these clinics be adequately supplied at all times? It may well be that this contract about which he spoke to enable drugs to be transported to these clinics will do the trick, but I doubt it seriously," said the former health minister. He also noted that the 115 public clinics also suffer from a shortage of qualified pharmacists to dispense medications. There is a recognised shortage of Bahamians with pharmacy qualifications at present.
Dr Nottage further noted the fact that only 11 private pharmacy companies have at present entered into contracts with the National Insurance Board to dispense medications under the NPDP, out of a total of over 30.
He said that his inquiries on the matter have revealed that many are concerned about receiving payment promptly from the government for their services, and the possibility of ending up at a financial loss through their participation in the plan.
"One of the problems for private pharmacies is that they will have to carry two different inventories, one for general patients and one for plan patients and that could be very expensive. They are concerned that they will purchase plan medications and if they are not sold that it will be at their loss and they will need help to cover any loss. They are concerned that they will only cover those plan items that will move quickly and therefore people may find they have some but not others. I think these are very real concerns that have to be looked at," said Dr Nottage.
In his contribution, Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham said he is "not satisfied" with the number of pharmacies that have agreed to participate in the plan and called on more to do so. He suggested they would see increased profits as more people will be attracted to make purchases at their pharmacies and outlined how claims for payment would be made within a week.
Former minister Dr Nottage noted that overall the PLP supports the NPDP "a little bit of something good is better than nothing," but considers it "limited" and something that they would have preferred to see come into effect along with the full comprehensive health coverage they pushed for during their last term in office.
The present government is of the view that their comprehensive plan was "unsustainable" in the form that was proposed.
July 23, 2010
tribune242
A political blog about Bahamian politics in The Bahamas, Bahamian Politicans - and the entire Bahamas political lot. Bahamian Blogger Dennis Dames keeps you updated on the political news and views throughout the islands of The Bahamas without fear or favor. Bahamian Politicians and the Bahamian Political Arena: Updates one Post at a time on Bahamas Politics and Bahamas Politicans; and their local, regional and international policies and perspectives.
Showing posts with label Dr Bernard Nottage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dr Bernard Nottage. Show all posts
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Monday, June 28, 2010
How serious is the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP)?
How serious is the PLP?
tribune242 editorial:
COMMENTING on our June 17 editorial - posted on The Tribune's website and headed: "Is this a gimmick for press headlines?" - a reader asked:
"Is it so, as the PLP claim, that the PM ended the Budget debate midstream in the committee stage? If so (and it was on TV for all to see) then is that not an example of denying the Opposition the right to freedom of speech on behalf of the Bahamian people?
"You don't have to like the PLP and you surely have the right to be an FNM partisan. However, in order to have some level of credibility, don't defend obvious wrong."
We are not defending an obvious wrong, nor do we intend to defend an opposition's attitude of arrogant entitlement -- that rules were not made for them.
In all facets of life to achieve harmony precedents are established and rules and procedures are followed.
So too in parliamentary debates. The debate to which our web site commentator refers is governed by constitutional rules. The rule that Opposition Fox Hill MP Fred Mitchell was trying to get around was one that does not allow amendment of a money bill that would change the state of the Treasury unless moved by a Cabinet Minister on the recommendation of the Cabinet. Mr Mitchell, not a cabinet minister, was obviously trying to exempt himself from acknowledging that this rule also governed the Opposition.
The Budget Communication was presented to the House on May 26 by Prime Minister Ingraham. The following week debate opened and all 41 House members -17 of them Opposition- spoke. At that time they could dissect and amend any part of the Budget they wanted. The Budget had to be completed before July 1- three days from now when it goes into effect. Well in advance of the debate government gave its timeline on how it proposed to proceed with the debate and projected when it should be completed. The Opposition had ample time to study the proposed Budget and if members had any policy issues they could have circulated draft amendments - including the one Mr Mitchell moved in the House -- for cabinet consideration. Obviously they did not do this.
After fully debating the Bill, the House resolved itself into a committee of the whole with the Speaker retiring from the chamber and the chairman taking the chair.
The Opposition, not having the numbers to defeat any part of the Bill, obviously decided to filibuster, and the filibuster started during examination of the estimates and expenditure of recurrent accounts. According to the Bahamas constitution, no amendment can be made to a money bill except by a cabinet minister with the full consent of the cabinet. As our readers know, Mr Mitchell is not a cabinet minister, and if he were serious he should have submitted his amendment for cabinet consideration well before the start of the debate-- he certainly had enough time to do so.
Because of the seriousness of the economy, the object of this Budget was to cut costs. Instead, Mr Mitchell proposed that funeral payments be increased from the present $650 to $1,300 per person for at least 1000 persons.
Mr Ingraham, obviously realising the Opposition's plan to delay passing of the Budget, warned Mr Mitchell that if he went down that road, he (Mr Ingraham) would move for closure. There is no debate on closure.
Not heeding the warning, the Opposition put the amendment. It was voted down. PLP MP Melanie Griffin by that time was on her feet with another motion -- the Opposition's plan to slow procedure became even more obvious as it appeared that one Opposition amendment was to follow another. The chairman ignored her. Closure was put. The Opposition packed their bags and left. The government continued to move the associated Budget Bills. It went through the Capital budget. So for the PLP to give the impression that the Budget process ended and nothing else was dealt with after they walked out, is just not true. The Budget was completed and passed after their disappearance.
However, what is of interest is that the item to cut parliamentary salaries was very high on the estimates of recurrent expenditure -- as a matter of fact it was Head 3. By the time closure came members were already on Head 44. This was an item about which the Opposition had expressed great concern. Government suggested cutting MPs' salaries by 5 per cent. Opposition Leader Perry Christie disagreed. He said the Opposition wanted salaries cut by 10 per cent. But Head 3 came and went and not a squeak from the Opposition about cutting anything. Why didn't they attempt to move a resolution on this one?
When FNM MP Carl Bethel pointed out this oversight, Dr Bernard Nottage, replied that a separate resolution on salaries was further down on the agenda and that is when they had intended to make their move to have parliamentary salaries reduced to 10 per cent rather than the FNM's five per cent recommendation. They missed the opportunity at Head 3 of the Estimates and skipped out of the House before their anticipated moment came for them to make a big splash by shaving a further five per cent off their parliamentary salaries for the sake of the people.
And so if they were really serious about increasing benefits for burying the indigent dead, and cutting their parliamentary salaries, all they had to do was follow the constitution and parliamentary rules. In other words there is no entitlement to bend the rules and no one is above the constitution -- not even the PLP.
Therefore we stand by our editorial of June 17 that in our opinion the PLP manoeuvres in the House were just gimmicks to attract headlines and impress the less informed.
June 27, 2010
tribune242 editorial
tribune242 editorial:
COMMENTING on our June 17 editorial - posted on The Tribune's website and headed: "Is this a gimmick for press headlines?" - a reader asked:
"Is it so, as the PLP claim, that the PM ended the Budget debate midstream in the committee stage? If so (and it was on TV for all to see) then is that not an example of denying the Opposition the right to freedom of speech on behalf of the Bahamian people?
"You don't have to like the PLP and you surely have the right to be an FNM partisan. However, in order to have some level of credibility, don't defend obvious wrong."
We are not defending an obvious wrong, nor do we intend to defend an opposition's attitude of arrogant entitlement -- that rules were not made for them.
In all facets of life to achieve harmony precedents are established and rules and procedures are followed.
So too in parliamentary debates. The debate to which our web site commentator refers is governed by constitutional rules. The rule that Opposition Fox Hill MP Fred Mitchell was trying to get around was one that does not allow amendment of a money bill that would change the state of the Treasury unless moved by a Cabinet Minister on the recommendation of the Cabinet. Mr Mitchell, not a cabinet minister, was obviously trying to exempt himself from acknowledging that this rule also governed the Opposition.
The Budget Communication was presented to the House on May 26 by Prime Minister Ingraham. The following week debate opened and all 41 House members -17 of them Opposition- spoke. At that time they could dissect and amend any part of the Budget they wanted. The Budget had to be completed before July 1- three days from now when it goes into effect. Well in advance of the debate government gave its timeline on how it proposed to proceed with the debate and projected when it should be completed. The Opposition had ample time to study the proposed Budget and if members had any policy issues they could have circulated draft amendments - including the one Mr Mitchell moved in the House -- for cabinet consideration. Obviously they did not do this.
After fully debating the Bill, the House resolved itself into a committee of the whole with the Speaker retiring from the chamber and the chairman taking the chair.
The Opposition, not having the numbers to defeat any part of the Bill, obviously decided to filibuster, and the filibuster started during examination of the estimates and expenditure of recurrent accounts. According to the Bahamas constitution, no amendment can be made to a money bill except by a cabinet minister with the full consent of the cabinet. As our readers know, Mr Mitchell is not a cabinet minister, and if he were serious he should have submitted his amendment for cabinet consideration well before the start of the debate-- he certainly had enough time to do so.
Because of the seriousness of the economy, the object of this Budget was to cut costs. Instead, Mr Mitchell proposed that funeral payments be increased from the present $650 to $1,300 per person for at least 1000 persons.
Mr Ingraham, obviously realising the Opposition's plan to delay passing of the Budget, warned Mr Mitchell that if he went down that road, he (Mr Ingraham) would move for closure. There is no debate on closure.
Not heeding the warning, the Opposition put the amendment. It was voted down. PLP MP Melanie Griffin by that time was on her feet with another motion -- the Opposition's plan to slow procedure became even more obvious as it appeared that one Opposition amendment was to follow another. The chairman ignored her. Closure was put. The Opposition packed their bags and left. The government continued to move the associated Budget Bills. It went through the Capital budget. So for the PLP to give the impression that the Budget process ended and nothing else was dealt with after they walked out, is just not true. The Budget was completed and passed after their disappearance.
However, what is of interest is that the item to cut parliamentary salaries was very high on the estimates of recurrent expenditure -- as a matter of fact it was Head 3. By the time closure came members were already on Head 44. This was an item about which the Opposition had expressed great concern. Government suggested cutting MPs' salaries by 5 per cent. Opposition Leader Perry Christie disagreed. He said the Opposition wanted salaries cut by 10 per cent. But Head 3 came and went and not a squeak from the Opposition about cutting anything. Why didn't they attempt to move a resolution on this one?
When FNM MP Carl Bethel pointed out this oversight, Dr Bernard Nottage, replied that a separate resolution on salaries was further down on the agenda and that is when they had intended to make their move to have parliamentary salaries reduced to 10 per cent rather than the FNM's five per cent recommendation. They missed the opportunity at Head 3 of the Estimates and skipped out of the House before their anticipated moment came for them to make a big splash by shaving a further five per cent off their parliamentary salaries for the sake of the people.
And so if they were really serious about increasing benefits for burying the indigent dead, and cutting their parliamentary salaries, all they had to do was follow the constitution and parliamentary rules. In other words there is no entitlement to bend the rules and no one is above the constitution -- not even the PLP.
Therefore we stand by our editorial of June 17 that in our opinion the PLP manoeuvres in the House were just gimmicks to attract headlines and impress the less informed.
June 27, 2010
tribune242 editorial
Friday, April 23, 2010
Dr Bernard Nottage: ... "far too many Bahamians" leave school without the necessary skills either to join the workforce or go on to further education
School leavers 'in skills crisis'
By ALISON LOWE
Tribune Staff Reporter
alowe@tribunemedia.net:
SOCIETY is in crisis as "far too many Bahamians" leave school without the necessary skills either to join the workforce or go on to further education, MP for Bain and Grants Town Dr Bernard Nottage said.
Speaking in parliament yesterday, the MP suggested the Bahamian population is "not as literate as we claim to be" and an "urgent review" of the education system is in order.
He went on to claim that the education system must be "placed in the hands of visionaries and social reformers" if it is to play the socially transformative role that is necessary to help The Bahamas escape the "disastrous" situation it finds itself in.
Dr Nottage made his comments in the context of the debate in the House of Assembly on the Bahamas Technical and Vocational Institute Bill, which seeks to deliver independence to the technical training school by incorporating it and placing it under the governance of a Board made up of public and private sector-based individuals.
The Government introduced the Bill as one which will enhance the reputation of the institution and cause it to create graduates who are more relevant to today's economy.
Dr Nottage "congratulated" the Government on the Bill, welcoming the fact that it removes political interference from the administration of the institution after 61 years of its existence, but said it must be looked at in the context of the Bahamian educational system as a whole.
The PLP MP said that despite successive governments investing an "extremely large" proportion of the country's national income on education and expanding enrollment over the years, the country's "national patrimony and wealth" is being "squandered as more and more Bahamians pass through a system which does not effectively prepare them for the mastery of their environment in our Bahamas."
He lamented that "quantitative" rather than "qualitative" improvements have been made to the system.
"Having once been the railroad to social mobility and liberation" education in The Bahamas is in need of "urgent review" and a "broad range of innovations," said the MP.
Illustrating his point, Dr Nottage suggested the Bahamas is "fooling itself" when it comes to its levels of educational literacy as many people lack basic knowledge when they leave school.
"We need to look carefully at general and basic literacy. We know the truth tells us we are not as literate as we claim to be, particular at mathematics and elementary understanding of science, which is absolutely necessary for success in today's economy," he said.
Referring to the "poor or unsatisfactory BGCSE results" which have hovered at a D or D- average for some time, he said these "are nothing less than the festering tip of an even greater problem."
"Far too many Bahamians leave school prepared for neither further education or for the workplace. And I say now as I said a decade ago disaster looms - in fact disaster is here...because of our failure to take decisive action."
"It is my deep-seated belief that Bahamian society is in crisis," he continued.
He linked this situation to a "too long" existing tendency to study problems but not act, mentioning in particular the failure to implement the recommendations of a 1992 report on the post secondary education system which he suggested could have helped the country avoid ending up in the position he claims it now finds itself in.
"As we go forward education can play one of two roles. On the one hand it can reflect and enforce and reproduce the existing social order with all of its injustices and failures and its tendency towards chaos or we can place the educational system in the hands of visionaries and social reformers and it can be used as a major weapon for social transformation.
"I'm sure all of us would choose the latter but it does requires us to give up some of the reigns and some of the control, allow those who are best suited to doing so to run these systems."
He said that it is with this need for politicians to step back from the decision-making process as it relates to education that he supported the BTVI Bill, which increases the independence of that institutions as it relates to its curriculum, hiring, student admissions and awards, among other things.
April 22, 2010
tribune242
By ALISON LOWE
Tribune Staff Reporter
alowe@tribunemedia.net:
SOCIETY is in crisis as "far too many Bahamians" leave school without the necessary skills either to join the workforce or go on to further education, MP for Bain and Grants Town Dr Bernard Nottage said.
Speaking in parliament yesterday, the MP suggested the Bahamian population is "not as literate as we claim to be" and an "urgent review" of the education system is in order.
He went on to claim that the education system must be "placed in the hands of visionaries and social reformers" if it is to play the socially transformative role that is necessary to help The Bahamas escape the "disastrous" situation it finds itself in.
Dr Nottage made his comments in the context of the debate in the House of Assembly on the Bahamas Technical and Vocational Institute Bill, which seeks to deliver independence to the technical training school by incorporating it and placing it under the governance of a Board made up of public and private sector-based individuals.
The Government introduced the Bill as one which will enhance the reputation of the institution and cause it to create graduates who are more relevant to today's economy.
Dr Nottage "congratulated" the Government on the Bill, welcoming the fact that it removes political interference from the administration of the institution after 61 years of its existence, but said it must be looked at in the context of the Bahamian educational system as a whole.
The PLP MP said that despite successive governments investing an "extremely large" proportion of the country's national income on education and expanding enrollment over the years, the country's "national patrimony and wealth" is being "squandered as more and more Bahamians pass through a system which does not effectively prepare them for the mastery of their environment in our Bahamas."
He lamented that "quantitative" rather than "qualitative" improvements have been made to the system.
"Having once been the railroad to social mobility and liberation" education in The Bahamas is in need of "urgent review" and a "broad range of innovations," said the MP.
Illustrating his point, Dr Nottage suggested the Bahamas is "fooling itself" when it comes to its levels of educational literacy as many people lack basic knowledge when they leave school.
"We need to look carefully at general and basic literacy. We know the truth tells us we are not as literate as we claim to be, particular at mathematics and elementary understanding of science, which is absolutely necessary for success in today's economy," he said.
Referring to the "poor or unsatisfactory BGCSE results" which have hovered at a D or D- average for some time, he said these "are nothing less than the festering tip of an even greater problem."
"Far too many Bahamians leave school prepared for neither further education or for the workplace. And I say now as I said a decade ago disaster looms - in fact disaster is here...because of our failure to take decisive action."
"It is my deep-seated belief that Bahamian society is in crisis," he continued.
He linked this situation to a "too long" existing tendency to study problems but not act, mentioning in particular the failure to implement the recommendations of a 1992 report on the post secondary education system which he suggested could have helped the country avoid ending up in the position he claims it now finds itself in.
"As we go forward education can play one of two roles. On the one hand it can reflect and enforce and reproduce the existing social order with all of its injustices and failures and its tendency towards chaos or we can place the educational system in the hands of visionaries and social reformers and it can be used as a major weapon for social transformation.
"I'm sure all of us would choose the latter but it does requires us to give up some of the reigns and some of the control, allow those who are best suited to doing so to run these systems."
He said that it is with this need for politicians to step back from the decision-making process as it relates to education that he supported the BTVI Bill, which increases the independence of that institutions as it relates to its curriculum, hiring, student admissions and awards, among other things.
April 22, 2010
tribune242
Thursday, July 22, 2004
Raynard Rigby, Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) Chairman says Embattled Holy Cross Member of Parliament - Sidney Stubbs still has The Party Support
Raynard Rigby added that talk of a possible bye-election is premature, because Mr. Stubbs has not yet exhausted the time provided under the constitution for him to have his bankruptcy order discharged
Chairman Says PLP Fully Behind Stubbs
Nassau, The Bahamas
22/07/2004
Despite his legal troubles, Holy Cross Member of Parliament Sidney Stubbs still has the full support of the Progressive Liberal Party, PLP Chairman Raynard Rigby said Wednesday.
“Mr. Stubbs lodged his appeal, the matter is still before the courts and so he is still entitled to due process under the constitution,” Mr. Rigby said.
He added that talk of a possible bye-election is premature because Mr. Stubbs has not yet exhausted the time provided under the constitution for him to have his bankruptcy order discharged.
Although Mr. Stubbs has said he has repaid the debt that led to Supreme Court Justice Jeannie Thompson declaring him bankrupt nearly four months ago, he still has to have the order reversed before he can participate in proceedings of the House of Assembly.
His time would expire around the same time that the House comes off its summer recess in late September.
“Our support is in line with the protection given to him under the constitution,” Mr. Rigby told the Bahama Journal.
“I’ve spoken with his attorneys and I have been advised that he still has a number of options available to him, and they are exploring those options with a view to bringing the matter to an end.
“If they are successful in their options then obviously there would not be a bye-election in Holy Cross.”
However, Mr. Rigby said earlier in the week that should a bye-election be called, his party would undoubtedly be victorious.
But Free National Movement supporters say this would be unlikely.
“Having been lost or hiding himself from the many embarrassing moments of his embattled colleague and party, Mr. Rigby appears to have lost touch with reality as to what is going on in New Providence and The Bahamas at this time,” read a statement from the Action Group of The FNM issued Tuesday.
“In its current state of unacceptability, the PLP would be hard-pressed to win a seat in a bye-election or any kind of election in New Providence or elsewhere in The Bahamas.”
Sources within the PLP, meanwhile, have told the Journal that thought is already being given to who the PLP would run should a bye-election be called, with some speculating whether this would be an ideal time for CDR leader Dr. Bernard Nottage to accept what amounted to an invitation from Prime Minister Perry Christie for him to rejoin the PLP.
Last week, Mr. Christie told the Journal, “Everyone knows that I have a great deal of personal affection and a great deal of political admiration for Dr. Nottage, and most certainly look forward to the time when a process can be engaged in - if that is the wish of Dr Nottage - towards his becoming a full fledged member again of the Progressive Liberal Party. I believe that is where he ought to be.”
For now, PLP officials are saying on the record that they are hopeful that Mr. Stubbs would once again take his place on the backbench when Members of Parliament return from their summer recess in September.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)