the user pays principle
The purpose of this paper is to identify and discuss some of the arguments for and against the imposition of user pays principle (UPP) charges for government services. The UPP policy is gaining popularity as governments attempt to make those receiving individual benefit accountable for the expense of that benefit.This paper analyses the arguments that a UPP system ensures more accountability and responsibility, assists in the management of scarce resources such as water, assists in traffic management, reduces price undercutting by the public sector and aids the achievement of the economic goal of efficiency.It goes on to discuss the arguments that a UPP system does not guarantee funds are directed where they are intended, it impedes the achievement of the goals of competition and efficiency, leads to declining education standards, prevents society form advancing, increases poverty, reduces access to adequate health care for the underprivileged and discourages the use of some services that needs to encouraged.The paper concludes with the acceptance that a UPP system has both benefits and costs and needs to be carefully managed to ensure a fair and equitable society is maintained and elitism is avoi
The provision of preventative health measures such as immunisation is impeded, as there is little hope of those who are unable to afford prevention taking the necessary steps. The NCSLFFP (1999) also support the argument that economic efficiency is achieved via the forces of supply and demand under a UPP system. Without free education society does not have the opportunity to advance itself, possibly leading to Australia being left behind in technological development and research and development in years to come, when compared to countries where higher education is free. Arguments Against UPPIstook (2003) points out that a UPP system does not necessarily bring the benefits promised. Under a UPP system private competition could be introduced with a public-private sector partnership where some services are contracted out providing extra resources and encouraging competition. Without adequate advances in research and development Australia will fail to attract investment, to the detriment of the economy with the possible impact of increased unemployment and reduced living standards. The backlog of road maintenance is estimated to be worth $400 billion and 42800 lives are lost annually on the roads as revenues raised are directed elsewhere (Istook, 2003). The NCSLFFP (1999) also cite the prevention of price undercutting by the government sector. It is something that needs to be carefully managed to ensure fair access to all services for all regardless of income level. One of the characteristics of the UPP system is that those benefiting from the service must pay for that service ensuring the cost is not borne by those not receiving any benefits.
Common topics in this essay:
Scheme HECS,
Partners NCSLFFP,
Health UPP,
Introduction Governments,
Executive Summary,
Jones Pendlebury,
Smith Institute,
City Perth,
According Matthews,
Europe Deloitte,
upp system,
accessed 15 2004,
15 2004,
public sector,
accessed 15,
access services,
ncslffp 1999,
deloitte 2003,
schrader 1998,
tertiary education,
arguments upp,
scarce resources water,
accessed 14 2004,
increasingly scarce resources,
declining education standards,
|
Acceptance Essays
