National Health Insurance Commission Bill Passes Second Reading

Following the yearnings for a change in the health insurance sector, a Bill for an act to repeal the National Health Insurance Scheme, (Act No 35 of 1999) and to re-enact the National Health Insurance Commission (NHIS), has passed the second reading at the House of Representatives.
The bill which seeks to establish a commission, to serve as a regulatory body, was unanimously adopted when put to vote by the Deputy Speaker, Emeka Ihedioha.
Leading the debate on the general principles of the bill, Ndudi Elumelu, argued that there was need to remove the word ‘Scheme’ and add the word ‘Commission,’ so as to accommodate Nigerians, across different shades.
According to him, the current existing scheme did not provide for vulnerable people like women and children. Elumelu added that ‘the proposed amendment bill will ensure that most of the’ loopholes” associated with National Health Insurance Scheme are addressed, stressing that the new bill will take care of these vulnerable people.’
He also emphasised that the amendment had made provision for public health, where public workers in the National Assembly and others would be taken care of.  The lawmaker urged his colleagues to support the second reading of the bill. Also supporting the bill, Samson Osagie, representing Edo state, added that the objective of the proposed legislation was to make the scheme more functional.
 ‘As parliamentarians, it is our duty to make laws that will impact on the people, we must rise to the occasion to make the health scheme functional to be able to deliver,’ Osagie said. He added that the bill provided a strong legislative work for government to provide health services at a minimal cost, irrespective of social status
 ‘Health is a very key social service that government must strive to attain at all times with minimal cost.’ However, while the bill was Okayed for a second reading, some legislators offered some amendments to it. Friday Itulah, Nkeiruka Onyejeocha, and Bimbo Daramola, queried why a commission should be established when the government was poised to reducing the cost of governance. They argued that the existing scheme was enough to address the issues of gaps.