Brexit and medical tourism

Ian Youngman looks at the impact of the EU referendum on private medical tourism in and out of the UK and how genuine inbound medical tourism will suffer no matter what the results.

The debate on how much health tourism does or does not cost the NHS has been drawn out with many wrong facts spouted by both sides.

Like most Brits I will be glad to see the back of the debate that dominates the media; with people losing interest daily and realising that politicians are the most irritating people on this planet.

This article is not about health tourism but the effect on private medical tourism both into and out of the UK.

Medical tourism to the UK

It is very hard to pin down inbound figures as London hospitals only mention international patients- and that can be medical tourists, students, tourists, business travellers, or the many thousands of foreign nationals that have London homes.

If we look only at people who decide to go to the UK for medical treatment they do come from all over – with an emphasis on Asia, Africa, China and The Middle East. None of these will care a jot as to whether the UK wants to stay in or leave the European Union.

Those that come from Europe may be put off if it costs more to come to the UK or if those who can go through the EU travellers channel can still go through that or will have to use the slower international one.

UK outbound medical tourism

The number of people from the UK going to Europe for treatment seems to have been slowing down in recent years as UK clinics have dropped prices and the glut of price and treatment comparison sites make it easier to find a cheap deal in the UK.

Many of those going to Europe are not going to EU countries but to cheaper countries in Eastern Europe. The number going outside of Europe is-like numbers of tourists- decreasing as people look closer to home.

The benefits of medical tourism to the UK

Most people going overseas for treatment either go to save money or for treatment not available in the UK.

Most people coming in to the UK seek specialist services and quality care that may not be available at home. They are not here for a cheap deal.

It is fairly certain that an inbound medical tourist spends several times what an outbound medical tourist does. Inbound ones may stay a week or several weeks, outbound ones tend to stay for a much shorter time.

It is probable that for every outbound medical tourist there are three or four inbound medical tourists.

So genuine private medical tourism brings in money to hospitals, employs people, and benefits the economy as a whole. It does what politicians of every hue want any industry to do- bring in more money and jobs than it exports.

So they should be praising it and encouraging it-instead of trying to vilify or kill it.

In or Out of the EU

The rather vicious, scare mongering and fear provoking campaign from those seeking to persuade us to stay in or leave – has been increasingly nasty to foreigners and in particular to Europeans.

Honestly, if I was a European thinking of getting treated in the UK, and all I saw on my television and online was the lies, half lies and often downright offensiveness from politicians towards Europe and Europeans- from the in campaigners as well as the out campaigners- I would think twice about going to the UK.

Government support for medical tourism

The UK government has never shown the slightest interest in promoting inbound medical tourism- partly because they equate medical tourism with health tourism.

By going on and on and on about how much health tourism costs Britain, politicians and authorities can only have damaged genuine inbound medical tourism.

The UK has no national medical tourism body, or promotional body for health tourism. The tourist bodies are not interested in promoting either- so there is nobody to stand up for genuine medical tourism.

But what annoys me is I cannot remember a single doctor or hospital, even those making a lot of money from international patients, standing up and saying “Hang on, stop using this negative term of health tourism, it brings in millions of pounds to our hospital every year and is good for the inbound economy.”

It is over, we have split political parties, annoyed millions of Europeans, and even managed to anger what few allies Britain has left in Europe.

And

EITHER OR DEPENDING ON THE VOTE

• Remain

Hooray, we have voted to stay in, so what was the point?

• Exit

The Little Englanders have won, we are leaving, perhaps.

As two out of three in the House of Commons and House of Lords wanted to stay in, getting through the legislation to actually exit could be difficult.

And the results is not legally binding, as it is only an advisory for the government that could use excuses of low turnout, legal problems, or even of getting a better deal from the EU – as a reason to ignore it all and not proceed.

In the wake of the vote..

Scotland will inevitably seek another vote on whether or not to go independent – and this time is more likely to succeed. If they win, Wales and Northern Ireland will want votes next.

Great Britain and the United Kingdom are often used randomly as being the same, but they are not. The UK is England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Great Britain is England, Wales and Scotland. Britain is a meaningless term, but you are British if you are from Great Britain or the UK!

The Isle of Man and the Channel Islands are not part of Great Britain or the UK, and are not part of the European Union.

The Republic of Ireland is not part of Britain, Great Britain or the UK, but is part of the European Union. So if Scotland Wales and Northern Ireland vote for independence, they can seek to stay in the European Union.

The real loser is genuine inbound private medical tourism.