BGU | MY PATH, Haim Doron, MD

health management. The courses I taught dealt with international health systems, and other relevant topics.

Establishing the National Institute for Health Policy and Health Services Research in Israel At the same time that I was actively involved in absorption of immigrant doctors and with establishing the Rambam Network for Family Medicine Research in Beer Sheva, I also was promoting the establishment of a national institute for health policy research. We were a handful of people who championed this idea: Prof. Mordechai Shani and Prof. Gabi Bin Nun were partners with me in this initiative. We formulated the objectives in the field of health policy and the field of health services research. And, of course, we thought a lot about how to fund such an institute. At the outset of preparation of the national health insurance law, clause 52 of the draft addressed only the role of a health council. We decided to incorporate a research institute into the law, via this clause: Back in 1973, the compulsory Parallel Tax Law had been passed. The Minister of Labor at the time, Yosef Almogi, viewed it as one of the first laws paving the way for a full-blown National Health Insurance Law Through this law, he sought to bypass the opposition of the Labor Federation to a national law. At the time the 1973 legislation was being formulated, he came to consult with us at Clalit about the bill. I went to talk to the president of Tel Aviv University, Prof. Yuval Ne’eman. I told him we needed money for occupational health research - that it was a shared interest of the University and the sick funds. Therefore, I suggested we both press the idea that the Parallel Tax law carry a clause with a reasonable sum, 0.01% of the budget, being earmarked for research. He was very taken by my suggestion and succeeded with my active support in inserting this clause in the Parallel Tax Law. When in the mid 1990s, the time was finally ripe for passage of a national health insurance law I told Prof. Mordechai Shani that this model was the way to go and we should press for inclusion of a clause such as this in the national health insurance bill. We succeeded in inserting the clause about the need for a health council and that a research institute would be funded to serve it. The National Institute’s operations hinge on the health council and are funded under clause 52 of the National Health Insurance Law. Formally, the health council is the public body within whose framework the National Institute operates. This clause in the Law enables the National Institute to support its research and publish its reports to this day. I was a member of the health council from 1999 until 2016. I was repeatedly appointed for an additional term although I never asked for this position. The composition of the council, however, was politicized according to sick funds, and so were its deliberations: The controversies and positions were often along party lines between MKs (members of the Knesset) from the Coalition in power and MKs from the Opposition. I didn’t think the council’s structure was a good way to operate, but that was Israeli reality. Thus, at the center of the health council stood long-existing antagonisms and differences between Clalit and the Ministry of Health, and between the rival party affiliations that colored each institution on the council. I believed one of the most important objectives was to create a neutral place where everyone could fit, including all the sick funds, all the medical institutes, all the schools of medicine, and all the research institutions dealing with the health system. This was a central objective of the National Institute, and one of its primary achievements. In all the operations of the Institute, all participate. The Institute carries its own “National Institute spirit,” one of collaboration and cooperation; and future generations must know that this important objective should never be compromised.

100