A source close to the National Health Insurance (NHI) implementation process has sought to clear the air with respect to a slew of allegations made by the Bahamas Insurance Association (BIA) and the Bahamas Insurance Brokers Association (BIBA) about the role played by the government’s technical advisor on the scheme and about how much – if any – real consultation has taken place as the scheme is designed and prepped for rollout.

The two associations, representatives of private health insurance companies and brokers respectively, have demanded that the government clarify whether Sanigest President James Cercone has been functioning as a government spokesman, and have also continued to assert that the government’s claims that consultation is going on within the industry is “disingenuous at best”.

The government has yet to respond publicly to the charges, but a source with knowledge of the process spoke with Guardian Business about the matter.

“Frankly, our role as contracted by the government is both to be the technical advisor and to support implementation. In fact our contract specifically speaks to implementation, and we’ve been contracted through to July 2016 precisely so that we support the implementation phase,” the source said.

“So I really don’t see where the conflict is, frankly, between being the technical advisor and supporting implementation. Obviously, we’re not implementing, per se. We’re only responsible for providing input and advice on how to get NHI implemented.”

Govt spokesperson

With regards to the accusation levied by the BIA and the BIBA that Cercone has been acting as a spokesperson for the government, the source disagreed.

“I don’t think that’s the case at all. In no regard has [Cercone] ever said that he is speaking for the government. In reality, he has only spoken out a few times, and it has always been as a technical advisor, as a technical consultant to the implementation process.

“I don’t think anything that he said could be misconstrued as the government’s position.”

Incendiary

The source – who spoke with the understanding that no identities would be revealed – charged that it was the BIA whose comments have been “extremely incendiary and absolutely not supported by any facts”.

“In fact, their allegations about cost and things like that, that we’ve specifically asked them for their methodology and to share with us what the basis of their calculation is and they’ve provided nothing. All they do is come back with these very high-level statements that it’s going to cost more than we’re saying it’s going to cost,” the source said.

Consultation

The source reiterated that there had been five meetings – “sit down meetings, full presentation” the source stressed – with the BIBA and other single engagements before the association’s latest round of salvoes began.

“And then they release a statement saying that there has been no stakeholder engagement.”

The source pointed out that the NHI Act of 2007 proposed a single-payer system, which would have been – in the private health insurers’ collective view – a nationalization of health insurance. It was because of stakeholder engagement, the source asserted, that the government was encouraged to promote a multi-payer system.

The source went on to cite a number of changes and inclusions made “in response to stakeholder consultations”.

In fact, the source said, 80 percent or so of what the BIA wants has been incorporated into the design that has been proposed.

“To be honest, we’re almost at a loss in the sense that we don’t understand how they can say there’s no stakeholder consultation when they’re meeting continuously with people on the implementation team to discuss these issues.”