STA, 13 April 2022 - Parties contesting the 24 April general election have prepared various measures to cut waiting times in Slovenia's healthcare, one of the most pressing issues even before the Covid pandemic hit. Meanwhile, most of them say in their responses to STA questions about healthcare that top-up health insurance should be abolished.
The parties would use all available capacities, including private doctors, to cut waiting times, although they would prioritise public healthcare providers.
Most of them would reform the system to a certain degree, reduce administrative burdens, introduce long-term staffing plans, reward more and better work, ensure transparency of public procurement, and fight against corruption.
Those parties that advocate allowing private practitioners to also work in the public healthcare system highlight the need for oversight and certain limits to this practice.
Only New Slovenia (NSi) and the Patriotic League would not abolish top-up insurance - a monthly sum of around EUR 35 paid directly to insurance companies in addition to monthly contributions employees and employers pay from wages to the ZZZS public health fund. The Democrats (SDS) have meanwhile not responded to this question.
The SDS believes the ZZZS must become an active buyer of services for its insurance policy holders and introduce a permanent mechanism to cut waiting times while integrating all health professionals into the effort. The party would allow doctors from the public system to work for private providers under clear conditions.
The Freedom Movement notes the list of waiting times is no longer kept, and would set up a task force to make waiting times acceptable. It would reform top-up insurance, before which a consensus should be reached how to raise the EUR 600 million from this source annually. They want to raise funds for healthcare to 10% of GDP.
The Marjan Šarec List (LMŠ) believes that more funds should be secured to cut waiting times and services should be paid as they are performed, especially where waiting lines are extremely long. Ljubljana and Maribor should get city hospitals, while top-up insurance should be abolished and the public health system strengthened.
Strongly supporting public healthcare, the Left would abolish the practice of doctors from the public sector working in the private sector, as a result of which their interest in having long waiting lines would wane. To cope with a shortage of doctors, one measure would be to import foreign doctors in an organised and controlled way.
The Pensioners' Party (DeSUS) would first overhaul waiting lists to exclude those who have received services in the private sector, while noting no other country has doctors working in both public and private systems. Before abolishing top-up insurance, all of its aspects must be examined not to worsen access to health services.
According to Our Land, waiting times could be cut by reforming healthcare, including abolishing top-up insurance, while the ZZZS public fund should be organised as a mutual insurer where those who pay insurance manage it. The state is responsible for quality, solidarity-based and accessible healthcare, and if the health fund does not have enough money to provide it, the state should help in with the funds from the budget.
New Slovenia (NSi) would involve all health providers into efforts to cut waiting times, which need better oversight. They would improve access to family doctors by allowing more enrolments at medical schools, while conditions should be created to attract Slovenian doctors working abroad. The party would abolish the ZZZS's monopoly to introduce competition in mandatory health insurance.
The Connecting Slovenia alliance of parties wants to create stimulating conditions to keep young doctors at home, while enhancing digitalisation and telemedicine. Changing or abolishing top-up insurance should be a matter of a broad consensus, while it promotes public healthcare but does not oppose public doctors working for private providers.
The Alenka Bratušek Party (SAB) would like to strengthen public healthcare by increasing investment to increase its quality and accessibility, while also increasing the number of family doctors and improving working conditions with less administrative burden and more digitalisation. A clear line is needed between public and private healthcare.
The Social Democrats (SD) want to cut waiting times for appointments with a specialist to no more than 30 says, which they would achieve with a set of measures, including a EUR 200 million emergency fund to cut waiting lines. They favour doctors employed at public providers to work overtime within the public system not in the private sector.
The National Party (SNS) believes that waiting times could be cut with good organisation and no corruption. The public health system must be preserved while private initiative should also be allowed.
The Pirates believe waiting times could be cut by changing standards and norms, financing and by reducing administrative burdens. They would not ban doctors working in the public system from working for private providers, but would enhance oversight.
The Patriotic League holds that doctors working in the public and private system in fact help keep the public system afloat, so they would not abolish this practice, arguing that patients are not interested where they are treated as long as they receive a quality service.
The Truth party would cut waiting lines by introducing "a public health system" as it argues the country currently has "a state health system". They promote fighting corruption, which would result in more money for healthcare and doctor pay.
