Will the Government keep the PSS?review

MIPS has submitted a response to the Department of Health on behalf of members as part of the First Principles Review of the indemnity Insurance Fund. The First Principles Discussion Paper poses questions in respect of the various schemes that have been implemented to assist with the availability and affordability of indemnity cover for health professionals and in particular, medical practitioners.

The review will reflect on whether the fund is meeting its objectives and whether schemes such as the Premium Support Scheme and High Cost Claims Scheme need to change.

The objectives of the Indemnity Insurance Fund (IIF) are to promote stability in the medical indemnity insurance industry, keep premiums affordable for doctors and ensure availability of affordable professional indemnity insurance for eligible midwives. The IIF is comprised of seven Commonwealth government assistance schemes:

  • Premium Support Scheme – incorporating the grandfathered Medical Indemnity Subsidy Scheme;
  • High Cost Claims Scheme;
  • Exceptional Claims Scheme;
  • Run-Off Cover Scheme;
  • Incurred-But-Not-Reported Scheme;
  • Midwife Professional Indemnity (Commonwealth Contribution) Scheme; and
  • Midwife Professional Indemnity Run-off Cover Scheme.

MIPS’ opinion

MIPS does not support any reduction in the total amount of Government support provided under the medical indemnity schemes because of the adverse impact that is likely to have on the community.

MIPS is confident that with appropriate modification the current medical indemnity schemes funding can be deployed more effectively to better align with the objective of ensuring equitable access to affordable health care for the community.

The Premium Support Scheme (PSS) is the most important of the government schemes in that regard. We believe that the PSS can be improved so that it is even more effective in ensuring equitable access of the community to affordable health care.

The Run-Off Cover Scheme (ROCS) should be extended to include periods of nondiscretionary cessation of practice arising from significant un-expected health events that do not currently qualify under ROCS. These additional qualifying events should also include those that lead to loss of Australian Healthcare Practitioners’ Regulation Agency (AHPRA) registration.

Read more in the full 25 page submission:  Medical Indemnity Protection Society Ltd (MIPS) Response to First Principles Review of Indemnity Insurance Fund (PDF)

Share this article on:

Contribute an article to the MIPS Matters

Provide feedback

How would you rate this article?* - required
Mandatory field(s) marked with *

The materials provided are for educational purposes only. Whilst all reasonable care has been taken in preparing these materials, including the accuracy of the information supplied, MIPS does not accept any liability whatsoever arising out of the use or reliance of the information provided. Contact MIPS 24/7 Clinico-Legal Support 1800 061 113 or education@mips.com.au for specific advice.