Europe’s Information Society project and Digital Inclusion: universal service obligations or social solidarity?

The importance of digital inclusion to Europe is obvious: as we move towards an ever more internet-communicating society the lack of access to basic digital infrastructures for a significant segment of the population is both problematic for those individuals without access and also problematic for those providing services which should be efficient and fully utilised. The EU’s ‘Information Society’ project has been the central plank of the European attempt to build a European digital marketplace, a concept which necessitates digital inclusion of the population at large. It is a project which prefers universal service obligations to achieve inclusion. If that is to be the preferred solution I suggest that we must consider exclusion from the banking system, given that the Information Society is at root an economic community.

However, universal service obligations are not the only method whereby digital inclusion can be encouraged and I posit we may need to reconsider the role of the state as supplier of services through the concept of ‘social solidarity’.

Perceived and reported access to the general practitioner: an international comparison of universal access and mixed private/public systems.

Timely and convenient access to primary healthcare is essential for the health of the population as delays can incur additional health and financial costs. Access to health care is under increasing scrutiny as part of the drive to contain escalating costs, while attempting to maintain equity in service provision. The objective was to compare primary care services in Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland, and to report on perceived and reported access to GP services in universal access and mixed private/public systems. A questionnaire study was performed in Northern Ireland (NI) and the Republic of Ireland (ROI). Patients of 20 practices in the ROI and NI were contacted (n = 22,796). Main outcome measures were overall satisfaction and the access to GP services. Individual responses and scale scores were derived using the General Practice Assessment Questionnaire (G-PAQ). The response rate was 52% (n = 11,870). Overall satisfaction with GP practices was higher in ROI than in NI (84.2% and 80.9% respectively). Access scores were higher in ROI than in NI (69.2% and 57.0% respectively) Less than 1 in 10 patients in ROI waited two or more working days to see a doctor of choice (8.1%) compared to almost half (45.0%) in NI. In NI overall satisfaction decreased as practice size increased; 82.8%, 80.4%, and 75.8%. In both systems, in large practices, accessibility is reduced when compared to smaller practices. The faster access to GP services in ROI may be due to the deterrent effect of the consultation charge freeing up services although, as it is the poorest and sickest who are deterred by the charge this improved accessibility may come at a significant cost in terms of equity. The underlying concern for policy makers centres around provision of equitable services.