There are currently twenty DHB's servicing Aotearoa - a country with five million people. A population that would fit comfortably in eightyone cities around the world. The fragmented system has twenty CEOs; twenty Boards (with up to eleven members each); twenty IT systems (to be confirmed); twenty HR departments; twenty payroll systems (to be confirmed); twenty of everything.
Great analysis Frank. It is ironic that the Nats are struggling to agree that one health authority will severely reduce the costs currently of 20 DHBs. It was a lovely Nat idea to run the DHBs as a business. Didn't really work out like that. There may have been many unnecessary deaths in NZ because of this misguided approach.
I was around when the RHAs,DHBs,and sundry other acronym health systems were set up. The promised "competition" was supposed to generate increased efficiency.
Unfortunately for everyone, it didn't work out that way and the postcode lottery of healthcare, along with chronic underfunding, has created dangerous consequences.
For Nats to continue to operate the same system,and expect different results is either blind adherence to political ideology or fear that Labour's reform will be a success.
Exactly, the part privatization of social services was a disaster. Just like Max reckoned the electrical sector would give us competition and cheaper power. The ideology was that the free market and corporate thinking would help society achieve fantastic results. All that has been shown up as BS after covid hit. Especially on the USA. You cannot privatize heath care. It's a basic requirement for Govt to supply to all its citizens, rich or poor. The Nats are always fixated on cost cutting social services. They haven't understood yet, that is a double edge sword, cut costs in health and you will spend more elsewhere. Bad economic thinking.
Great analysis Frank. It is ironic that the Nats are struggling to agree that one health authority will severely reduce the costs currently of 20 DHBs. It was a lovely Nat idea to run the DHBs as a business. Didn't really work out like that. There may have been many unnecessary deaths in NZ because of this misguided approach.
Thanks, Clem.
I was around when the RHAs,DHBs,and sundry other acronym health systems were set up. The promised "competition" was supposed to generate increased efficiency.
Unfortunately for everyone, it didn't work out that way and the postcode lottery of healthcare, along with chronic underfunding, has created dangerous consequences.
For Nats to continue to operate the same system,and expect different results is either blind adherence to political ideology or fear that Labour's reform will be a success.
I maintain it is likely the latter.
Exactly, the part privatization of social services was a disaster. Just like Max reckoned the electrical sector would give us competition and cheaper power. The ideology was that the free market and corporate thinking would help society achieve fantastic results. All that has been shown up as BS after covid hit. Especially on the USA. You cannot privatize heath care. It's a basic requirement for Govt to supply to all its citizens, rich or poor. The Nats are always fixated on cost cutting social services. They haven't understood yet, that is a double edge sword, cut costs in health and you will spend more elsewhere. Bad economic thinking.