Labour Minister Criticises Health Insurance Board and Bureaucracy

Labour, Employment and Social Security Minister Dipakumar Shah publicly expressed strong dissatisfaction with the current state of Nepal’s health insurance system, criticizing the Health Ministry, Health Insurance Board officials, and the bureaucratic culture within the government during a program marking 10 years of the health insurance scheme.

Speaking at the event, Minister Shah said the health insurance program is in a weak and unsustainable condition, pointing to a major financial gap between revenue and spending. According to him, the scheme collects only around Rs 3–4 billion in contributions, while annual expenditure has reportedly climbed to around Rs 28–30 billion, making the system difficult for the government to sustain.

He blamed not only the board but also the Health Ministry, hospitals, and health workers, saying the problem is rooted more in poor management and structural weaknesses than in a lack of money. Shah also accused hospitals of encouraging unnecessary tests and overuse of services, which he said has worsened the burden on the insurance program.

In one of his strongest remarks, the minister said that after becoming a minister he realized that bureaucrats often “control leaders”, arguing that civil servants have played a major role in governance failures. He urged officials to stop “guiding leaders around” and to take responsibility for improving the system.

Shah also targeted the Health Insurance Board’s decision-making process, saying board members are being treated like mere “rubber stamps” rather than being allowed to play a meaningful role. He questioned whether major decisions were being made transparently and in the interest of the public, and called for a review of the board’s structure and accountability.

The controversy drew added attention because the article notes that Shah’s wife, Junu Shrestha, had previously been appointed as a board member, removed over repeated absences, and later returned to the board a detail that has fueled further scrutiny of his remarks.