Re: [GPCG_TALK] Way cleared for electronic scripts

[Alex]

On 09/08/2006, at 9:38 AM, Greg Twyford wrote: Wal Tracey wrote: On 31/07/2006, at 10:24 PM, Richard Hosking wrote: Richard Most people would agree that a national deidentified dataset may be valuable in the future. I can see a big push looming from ADGP to drive their agendas using the existing infrastructure of the Divisions This is our opportunity to kill off the whole divisions apparatus.  We should studiously ignore them and all their projects. Wal, You see no value in Divisions, even in their local activities which most try to make relevant to members? I admit that we have become less able to be self-directive and respond to local needs and more bound to objectives determined in Canberra, but I'm surprised you are so negative. Yes, we mostly wonder about ADGP too, and we've been making our concerns felt as best we can. Unfortunately Greg, many of us see Divisions as simply agents of the government intrusion into our surgeries and into the de-professionalisation of general practice. This is because the activities which come out of Divisions appear to be more about implementation of restrictive government policies than supporting GPs in their work. In my case the Division could disappear tomorrow and its passing would have no negative impact on the delivery of services to my patients. Divsions claiming to be the largest representative bodies of GPs really get up my nose as they are an unelected swill with less representation than the Senate to which Paul Keating referred. It is unfortunate that the occasional worthy soul such as yourself is surrounded by a sea of government apparatus. Alex

_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
Gpcg_talk@ozdocit.org
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk