06/02/2018
NHS: “BENEFITS” AND “HEALTH TOURISTS”. WHO ARE THEY?
For all of the changes to the UK over the last century, the ideal of “fair play” still seems to be a pretty fundamental part of Britain’s national self-image. The concept that anyone – especially anyone foreign – might try to take advantage of efforts to play fair is a surefire way to generate lots of angry headlines.
So the very idea that the institutions Britain established to ensure the nation’s poorest and most vulnerable were protected financially and medically – the NHS and the welfare state – might be being systematically abused by “benefit tourists” or “health tourists”.
But who actually counts as a “benefit tourist”, or a “health tourist” and how much do they cost the UK?
The lack of an agreed definition of who counts as a “benefits tourist” makes it very hard to discuss the subject with any real clarity. One definition would be someone who travels with the primary objective of acquiring benefits, but there is no useful data on motivations of this sort.
Non-EU migrants do not have recourse to public funds until they have been resident in the UK for five years, so benefits alone are not realistic as the primary motivation for non-EU migrants to travel to the UK.
So the easiest way of identifying the scale of “benefits tourism” as an issue is to look at the use of benefits by EU migrants.
The UK’s membership of the European Union means citizens of EU countries who come to the UK have access to its welfare system on essentially equal terms with British citizens, which could arguably provide a motivation for some to travel to the UK.
The Daily Mail report broadened the definition of “health tourists” to include all foreign visitors and short-term migrants. Clearly this increases the costs to the NHS, but these migrants are not included as health tourists in the report, and have the legal right to use the service.