(de-news.net) – Chancellery Minister Thorsten Frei’s recent call for cutbacks in the healthcare system was firmly rejected by Tanja Machalet (SPD), the chair of the Bundestag Health Committee. Press accounts indicated that she viewed the proposal as both medically unwise and politically destabilizing, contending that neither reductions in services nor public debate about potential cutbacks—especially when initiated by policymakers who were themselves unlikely ever to depend on the solidarity-based health-insurance system—would contribute to improving population health outcomes. Observers noted that she urged Frei to refrain from speculative reforms and instead await the forthcoming recommendations of the government-appointed commission on statutory health-insurance financing, arguing that premature interventions would only heighten public uncertainty. Her remarks reportedly also faulted Frei for declining to specify which benefits he believed should be curtailed, thereby weakening the credibility of his argument.
Machalet acknowledged that Germany continued to spend disproportionately on inefficient institutional structures and on treatment-centered care, a pattern that has long been criticized by health-policy experts as both costly and misaligned with contemporary needs. She argued, however, that the appropriate response was not indiscriminate cuts but a strategic strengthening of system governance. This, she suggested, required implementing the hospital reform, modernizing emergency-care pathways, and advancing the primary-care model embedded in the coalition agreement—measures intended to improve efficiency while preserving equitable access. Machalet further pointed out that Germany lagged behind comparable European systems in preventive health investment, a deficiency she described as economically shortsighted. In her view, earmarked revenue from fiscal instruments such as a sugar tax or increased levies on alcohol and tobacco could support targeted prevention programs, ultimately relieving financial pressure on both health and long-term-care insurance by reducing the incidence of chronic disease.
Frei, by contrast, had previously argued that enhancing cost-effectiveness in the healthcare system would inevitably require the discontinuation of certain benefits. He maintained that international examples demonstrated the feasibility of such an approach and suggested that eliminating selected services would not diminish overall population health. According to his public statements, resistance to these measures was to be expected, but he nevertheless framed them as necessary steps taken in the broader public interest, positioning cost containment as essential to safeguarding the long-term sustainability of the healthcare system.
