Ian Cheong wrote: > The historical record shows ... important national discussions were held > about the need for secure communications standards in 2004. The relevant > committee was IT-014-04. > https://committees.standards.org.au/COMMITTEES/IT-014/MEETINGREPORTS/J0039/IT-014-PUBLIC-PUBLICMEETINGREPORT-MTG-039.HTM > > see document: > https://committees.standards.org.au/COMMITTEES/IT-014/MEETINGREPORTS/J0039/Panel%20discussion%20Secure%20Electronic%20Communications.rtf
It says in the latter document: "MM – interoperability is most important. IT-014-04 will have as a new work item. " MM is Mark Mynott, I think. So did IT-014-04 ever add secure messaging interoperability to its agenda as a new work item? My point is that if Standards Australia sets itself up as *THE* national standards setting body in health IT, then it needs to take some responsibility for creating standards when they are clearly needed, and some of the blame if such standards are not created in a timely manner. > Work was initiated, but NeHTA was doing a consultancy in the area at the > time .... so nothing much happened quickly pending the outcome of the > NeHTA consultancy. I have never seen a report from that consultancy. I > think it was buried. Another consultancy emerged in its place I believe. In 2004 the clearly espoused NeHTA line was that "NeHTA is not a standards setting body" - thus Standards Australia IT-014 cannot blame NeHTA for Standards Australia's lack of action on secure health message communications. NeHTA was at that time very clearly looking to Standards Ausralia IT-014 to produce the standards which it could then annoint. That boat was well and truly missed, alas. > In the meantime, MediConnect/HealthConnect were implementing projects > using secure communications. But those methods seem to have ended up in > the dust. > > The GPCG interoperability project created a small code base to make > secure interfaces work to deliver data. Ask Horst what we ended up with. Failed or canned projects by third parties are not an excuse for Standards Australia failing to work on secure interoperable health messaging standards. > NeHTA still has secure communications on its agenda. Agreed that the ball is no longer in the court of Standards Australia IT-014, and that (at the risk of mixing sporting metaphors), NeHTa has the running on this. > And general practice no longer has a unified voice in this space. And > there does not appear much interest in that either. And pockets on > uncoordinated activity are the best that is happening presently. > Oliver's is a great example. Agreed that Oliver is on the right track and others should emulate him. Tim C _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
