This article raised the issue last week:
'Invisible' health technology companies in Australia call for procurement reform and sustainable government investment in industry-first survey
The surveyed companies overwhelmingly reported that the federal government stifles innovation.
By Lynne Minion
March 15, 2022 02:25 AM
Following two years of a pandemic in which technology has underpinned Australia's COVID-19 response, digital health companies have claimed the federal government stifles innovation and called for the reform of procurement processes, according to a new report by the peak organisation representing the industry.
WHAT IT'S ABOUT
The Medical Software Industry Association's "Beyond The Pandemic – Future Proofing Australia's Health Technology Industry", surveyed its members – which include 150 companies from start-ups to large listed entities – and found two thirds of respondents (68 per cent) provided pandemic-related services.
However, companies overwhelmingly reported the federal government stifles innovation (59 per cent), while almost 61 per cent said international companies are favoured over Australian companies in federal government contracts. More than half (53 per cent) also see the government's ICT procurement processes as unfair and 74 per cent felt unsupported by government.
WHY IT MATTERS
According to the report, which has been released in the lead up to the federal budget and the upcoming election, health technologies have "replaced the stethoscope" as the single most important tool of GP practice.
Since March 2020, according to "Beyond The Pandemic", more than 96 million telehealth services have been delivered to more than 16.7 million patients. As of 9 February, more than 38 million ePrescriptions had been issued, and more than 62 million COVID-19 tests had been processed by 14 February.
The survey also found that 35 per cent of respondents received government funding for pandemic-related work but, of those, only 6 per cent said it covered expenditure. One claimed it invested more than $5 million in providing covid services.
ON THE RECORD
"In the last two years we have seen great improvements in the level of collaboration between industry and the Department of Health and the Australian Digital Health Agency and even Services Australia," MSIA CEO Emma Hossack told Healthcare IT News.
"However, from now on it’s clear that unless industry is involved with the government in designing a sustainable business case, all of those efforts and the enormous steps forward will have been of little enduring benefit to Australia.
"Things worked so well in terms of implementing technologies that fuelled the pandemic response it will ideally bring them to the table. While there is a level of trust and partnership, we have an opportunity now to work out how we can cooperate in achieving the seamless healthcare system Australia needs. But if the work is not done now, we are unlikely to have that galvanised business case again."
More here:
There is also coverage here:
Wednesday, 16 March 2022 11:04
Health technology companies demand for fairer procurement process and better recognition
Health technology companies are calling for fairer procurement processes and improved funding, according to a report by the Medical Software Industry Association.
However, according to MSIA’s Beyond the Pandemic – Future Proofing Australia’s Health Technology Industry report, it claims the sector remains unsung and invisible.
On the heels of the government announcing the federal budget and upcoming election, the report found that health companies overwhelmingly believe the government stifles innovation (59%) while almost 61% said companies are at a disadvantage compared to international companies in federal government contracts.
More than half (53%) see the government's ICT procurement processes as unfair and 74% feel unsupported by government.
Thirty-five percent of respondents received government funding for pandemic-related work but, of those, only 6% said it covered expenditure.
The report claims health tech “has replaced the stethoscope” as the single most important tool of general practitioners.
The report reads: “Health information and how it is collected, delivered and stored, is possibly the most essential service any Australians use. Yet to most, it is invisible.”
“Any interaction with immunisations, GPs, hospitals, allied health, aged care, Indigenous care, drug and alcohol addiction care providers, disabilities care, specialists, prescriptions medications, radiology, pathology and more will depend on the efficacy – and indeed the operation – of health software.”
“It
works quietly in the background converting data into valuable information.”
Health technology companies have contributed by conducting telehealth
consultations, prescribing e-scripts, vaccine booking platforms, virtual hospitals,
testing and much more:
Since March 2020, more than 96 million telehealth services have been delivered
to more than 16.7 million patients, the report estimates.
As of 9 February, more than 38 million e-Prescriptions had been issued.
More than 62 million COVID-19 tests had been processed by 14 February.
Ninety-five percent of Australians aged 16 and over are fully vaccinated.
The MSIA suggested five recommendations to the federal government to ensure the success of Australia's health technology industry. These include the development of a sustainable business case, funding to enable the thousands of healthcare systems to be safely interconnected, a fair go in selling products to government, co-design of a scheme that allows Australian companies to compete against generic/non-health specific multinationals, and greater commitment to skills development.
More here:
And here:
HealthTech firms ‘unsupported by government’: industry report
Brandon How
Reporter
Alongside five recommendations, the Medical Software Industry Association (MSIA) published the results of its industry survey, which indicated the need for greater support from the federal government.
In particular, 59 per cent of companies say the federal government “stifles innovation.” Further, the federal government’s ICT procurement processes were deemed unfair by nearly half of companies.
The MSIA’s ‘Beyond the Pandemic’ report says that HealthTech companies have made significant contributions during the COVID-19 pandemic. This includes the delivery of 96 million telehealth services since March 2020, and more than 38 million ePrescriptions since February 9, 2022. In the last month alone, more than 62 million COVID-19 tests have been processed.
Yet following two years of supporting the pandemic response, 74 per cent of respondent companies said they felt “unsupported by government.” In addition, although 35 per cent of respondents stated that they received government funding for pandemic-related work, only 6 per cent say it was sufficient to cover expenditure.
The full report can be accessed here.
MSIA’s five recommendations to “create a fair, sustainable, innovative Australian [HealthTech] industry” are as follows:
- The development of a sustainable business case
- Funding to connect the thousands of different health systems securely
- “A fair go in selling products to governments.” MSIA say the current requirements to work with the government is too costly to comply with
- Design a scheme that includes guarantees to Australian companies to allow them to compete against non-health specific multinational corporations with deep pockets
- Greater commitment to skills development, including in cybersecurity
MSIA chief executive officer Emma Hossack said that if the government acts on these recommendations it can capitalise on the recent rapid development of the HealthTech industry.
Here is the link – with a link to the repost:
https://www.innovationaus.com/healthtech-firms-unsupported-by-government-industry-report/
In my experience all these claims made here are pretty true.
Government procurement everywhere is extremely rule based with inbuilt biases to large companies and imagined risk reduction. From my experience the mantra was pretty much – ‘no-one ever lost their job by buying IBM (Cerner / Oracle or Epic)’
The outcome was usually either more work for the global software providers or the global consulting and software houses.
Indeed, on occasions, I have been aware of deliberate actions on the part of Government agencies to supress and block smaller Australian players – and to only start to use them when the businesses had obtained so larger market share they could be ignored.
There is no doubt in my mind fairer and less onerous procurement practices would be in every one’s interest!
Do you have a
‘war story’ on the topic of being messed about and treated unfairly by Government
in a procurement process you can share? Suggestions on what extra may be done also welcome!
David.
13 comments:
"In the last two years we have seen great improvements in the level of collaboration between industry and the Department of Health and the Australian Digital Health Agency and even Services Australia," MSIA CEO Emma Hossack told Healthcare IT News.
It's not as though she has a conflict of interest or anything.
All very well for Emma to state the case for the MSIA but let's face the facts - all she is doing is repeating the same old same old once again; basically the same old rhetoric we have been hearing since the 1980s /90s. Nothing changes, well, almost nothing. The plays the same, only the actors change.
The MSIA has no power, no influence and no bite. All it has is the vested interest of its Members and that spells conflict.
I thought it was great that she said "and even Services Australia". That's some faint praise.
Having read the report, there is a pretty interesting survey of member companies and it is brutal to the government.
Basically the smart thing to do is have nothing to do with government bureaucrats. Didn't the Promedicus CEO say just that a few days ago. No wonder he's the billionaire.
For people like those mentioned there is a simple playlist - build the circle, spout inclusiveness and collaboration, surprise opinion, isolate, denial close ranks, rinse and repeat. Sadly to thrive in these environments one becomes a darker person than they started out as
I think the MSIA is finally being outspoken. The fact is that companies in the sector have done some amazing work during the pandemic and the government takes it all for granted. And when it comes to tenders it generally chooses international companies
"outspoken"!? In what way? For a decade or more they have brown-nosed to government and bureaucrats. What is so different now I ask?
The failure to support local vendors is not limited to healthcare:
DTA’s ‘disappointing’ Digital Marketplace to merge with ICT platform
https://www.innovationaus.com/dtas-disappointing-digital-marketplace-to-merge-with-ict-platform/
Politically oriented bureaucrats never learn from their mistakes. They have been trying to do this for at least 4 decades and failed every time.
@5:42PM Not so long ago Emma Hossack was CEO of Extensia which has just announced it has been taken over / acquired by Hills Health Limited. Not sure how many shares or what dollar value was involved!
Makes you wonder what a company that used to make Hill's Hoists knows about healthcare.
Remember Ted Pretty (ex Telstra) during all the hype of the .com years. He subsequently was CEO of Hills Limited for 2.5 years from Sep 2012 during which time he convinced the Hills' Board to enter the health market!
Post a Comment