Once the government takes over our healthcare, what's next? Well let's look to other socialized healthcare systems. How about Ireland? Here's an interesting article. It's about how the Pharmacies and Medicines are run by their government too. So it stands to reason that we too - - down the path to full single payer healthcare --- will "take over" our drug manufactures and even the local mom and pop pharmacies.
Read for yourself what a government can do, when it owns everything related to your healthcare. Maybe their power is being used for the good of the people in this case, but by forcing a pharmacy owner into operating a business they want to close. How can that be good? It is very un-American and anti-capitalism to say the least. But if government owns and controls the pharmacies and drug companies, can't their power also be used to ration medicines in the name of a good profit too? Hmmm.....
THE HSE yesterday secured a High Court order compelling more than 30 pharmacies based in the east of the country to continue to provide medicine to the public under the terms of the community drugs schemes.
The HSE sought the order due to what it claims is the “grave risk” to public safety due to the pharmacies’ failure to give notice that they have ceased providing drugs and medicines in accordance with the terms of the community pharmacy contractor (CPC) agreements.
Mr Justice Garrett Sheehan granted the HSE an interim injunction against 35 pharmacies in the Hickey Group and the Bradley Group of pharmacies, which have entered into such agreements with the HSE.
The two groups, which are separate to each other, operate pharmacies in counties Dublin, Kildare, Meath, Louth, Wexford and Wicklow.
Under the terms of the injunction, which was granted on an ex parte (one side only) basis, 35 of the groups’ pharmacies must continue to provide services to the HSE pending the service of a notice of termination to continue to provide those services in accordance with the terms of the CPC.
Mr Justice Sheehan said he was satisfied to grant the order as this was a matter of the “utmost urgency.”
He also rejected the argument made on behalf of the defendants, in correspondence with the HSE, that a dispute resolution clause contained in the contractor agreement precluded the health body from coming to court to seek an injunction.
The judge made the matter returnable to Monday morning.
Seeking the order, Eileen Barrington, for the HSE, said the health executive had come to court amid fears that patients may not be able to obtain medicines from the defendants. This carried a risk of endangering the health of people who participate in the various schemes.
Ms Barrington said the defendants did not give notice that they intended to cease to provide services. She said that after the Government announced in the 2009 financial emergency measures in the public interest Act that it was cutting the remuneration paid to pharmacists under the CPC agreement, many contractors announced they were withdrawing from the scheme.
The HSE wrote to all pharmacists requesting confirmation that they would continue with the scheme after August 1st.
However, Ms Barrington said that neither of the two defendants gave the required 30 days notice that they intended to withdraw from their respective agreements with the HSE, so it was assumed they would continue to provide services after August 1st.
She said it was indicated in a newspaper article on July 31st that it was claimed that Hickeys was withdrawing from the community drugs scheme. When the HSE sought clarification on that claim none was given.
She said the HSE included on its website the names of all the pharmacies that have not terminated their contracts, in order to assist the public. The defendants’ names appear on the site because the groups have not validly terminated their contracts.
It was the HSE’s claim that 21 out of the 27 pharmacies in the Hickey Group and 14 out of 16 of the pharmacies with the Bradley group are not complying with the CPC agreements, Ms Barrington said.
Solicitors acting for the defendants have never sought to deny that the pharmacies were closed or not providing the services, or that they intended to terminate their contracts, she said.
The pharmacies’ solicitors have refused to state if their clients will comply with the contractual obligations or not.
“A pharmacy could be closed today but open tomorrow,” said Ms Barrington, adding that it seemed that this was a plan designed to cause “maximum disruption” and put “political pressure” on Minister for Health and Children, Mary Harney.
The court also heard that the HSE’s action does not have any bearing on the constitutional challenge against the 2009 emergency measures being brought by the Haire Group of pharmacies.
-- Edited by thebword on Sunday 9th of August 2009 12:50:21 PM
Well, the Irish system isn't on the table here either so I hope they address their issues etc. but, we're not facing the Irish system. We are facing the highly unworkable Obamacare b.s.
