Why should people come to Britain and enjoy the benefits of the free Health Service when they do not subscribe to the national revenues?
The fact is, of course, that visitors to Britain subscribe to the national revenues as soon as they start consuming certain commodities, drink and tobacco for example, and entertainment.
Instead of rejoicing at the opportunity to practice a civilized principle, Conservatives have tried to exploit the most disreputable emotions in this among many other attempts to discredit socialized medicine.
Amendments to the National Health Service (Charges to Overseas Visitors) Regulations 1989 have excluded a number of vulnerable groups from being eligible for free healthcare, including failed asylum seekers, undocumented migrants and those who had overstayed their visa.
The NHS spends an average of £470/per individual a year (the majority of which is raised from general taxation[1] of visitors as well as residents[6]) on treating the people who pay the surcharge.
[17] There is evidence that the existence of the charging regime deters people from seeking early treatment, and that will incur additional costs, and in the case of infectious conditions, risks to public health.
[21] The Royal College of Nursing says that migrants working in the NHS should be exempt from the surcharge because this would help tackle the health service’s staffing crisis.
The surcharge applies to each member of the family, and the college quotes the case of a Kenyan nurse working in Luton, whose children had to return to Kenya because she could not afford to pay £3,600 to ensure that she, her partner and four children could receive NHS care during her three-year stint working in the NHS.
They said that the regulations were a danger to health because they deterred people with infectious conditions from seeking early treatment, and undermined trust in doctors.