LETTERS: The news that the critical allowance will be postponed is unwelcome. The allowance was introduced to keep the cream of the crop in service and to prevent a brain drain.
For civil servants, the critical allowance makes up about 15 per cent of our take-home salary, so introducing the only incentive we have to continue serving the people will be in the healthcare industry’s best interest.
If we are looking for ways to tighten our budget where healthcare is concerned, a revision of the healthcare system is in order.
The universal healthcare system that we have implemented has been our source of pride because it has enabled healthcare to be accessible to even the poor.
Medications, procedures and consultations are at everybody’s disposal at a nominal cost.
As altruistic as its purpose started out to be, the wear and tear of such a system onacountry is beginning to show.
I discharge patients with medication that most cannot afford if the government did not subsidise it. It’s not just medication. It includes services too, such as physiotherapy, occupational therapy and other ancillary services.
This has created complacency and a lack of responsibility for one’s health.
Many do not take their medication, default on follow-up meetings, ignore medical advice and end up with complications, adding to the burden on the healthcare system.
Preventive campaigns have been launched, but it is time for a more rigorous approach to combat the increasing cost of the healthcare system.
It is about time we came up with a solution to budget woes.
Abolishing the critical allowance is not only damaging to the morale of civil servants, it is also an ineffective short-term measure with dire long-term complications.
THANUJA SUBRAMANIAM
Kuala Lumpur
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of the New Straits Times.