This blog is totally independent, unpaid and has only three major objectives.
The first is to inform readers of news and happenings in the e-Health domain, both here in Australia and world-wide.
The second is to provide commentary on e-Health in Australia and to foster improvement where I can.
The third is to encourage discussion of the matters raised in the blog so hopefully readers can get a balanced view of what is really happening and what successes are being achieved.
Speaking at midday 20/9/2022 the Treasurer has noted a number of programs have not had much funding continued by Coalition into more than the next few months so ongoing funding is being reviewed given the costs are not presently included in planning. This deficit was discovered since the change of Government in May.
The first item he mentioned, among others, was the Digital Health Record program!
Looks at risk to me!
David.
"The first item the (Treasurer) mentioned, among others, was the Digital Health Record program! Looks at risk to me!"
ReplyDeleteThat sounds like wishful thinking David.
The Treasurer and Finance Minister can't just cut programs willy-nilly. All they can do is to make recommendations to the Expenditure Review Committee (ERC). The ERC must then accept or reject the recommendations and the end-result is then submitted to Cabinet for final ratification.
The bureaucrats have made the Digital Health Record so politically complex, with the arguments for and against so mired in confusion and contradictions, that, absent a short clear explanation of the issues before them, it is unlikely anyone on the ERC would know what to do - other than maintain the status quo and kick the can further down the road one more time.
I mean really, what's another $1.6 billion over 4 years - who cares? Health has plenty of money to toss around; doesn't it?
"The Treasurer and Finance Minister can't just cut programs willy-nilly"
ReplyDeleteThey don't have to. They can just tell the states (who actually deliver healthcare services) that if they want it, they can pay for it, along with ADHA.
Considering they are all (or at least most of them) are building their own health record systems that actually hold useful data, I doubt that they will want to take over full payment.
And I doubt that the states get much value out of ADHA.
"They can just tell the states (who actually deliver healthcare services) ...."
ReplyDeleteYou are wrong to infer the Federal Government doesn't deliver any healthcare services.
The states are responsible for delivering hospital healthcare. But hey, the feds are responsible for Aged Care, Disability and of course Primary / Specialist care which fall under Medicare - and if that's not healthcare, then what is it?
The Feds are responsible for funding healthcare, not delivering it.
ReplyDeleteAll those services you refer to are delivered by, in the main, small to medium businesses.
and if you think the Feds are doing a good job funding healthcare services:
ReplyDeleteFamily doctors warn that GP surgeries may close en masse amid funding and recruitment crisis
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-06/gps-turning-away-from-medicine-as-pressures-mount/101505626