Hello David, Friday, November 3, 2006, 3:51:29 AM, you wrote:
>> >> Left out is an explanation of the $4.5 million in receivables at the >> end of the year which is mostly members contributions owing. Seems >> some States are not paying promptly? DG> Sounds like the States think it's a bit dodgy. ? DG> I wondered whether the production of an implementable strategy for the DG> secure exchange of health information is a liability found somewhere DG> else in the accounts. An impossible task I grant, but nice to dream. >> The total lack of any sense of the need to provide more than the >> scantiest accountability or openly discuss and consult on future plans >> and directions is amazingly arrogant and borders on a scandal. DG> I always thought their task was impossible in the favoured free DG> enterprise financial model of Australian medical and IT delivery. DG> How long before the Feds pull the plug? You have to have some sympathy... At this point its looking very much like the Matrix where Neo faces the Architect and realizes this is the fourth version of the the matrix and its all about to start over again... In this context replace "The Matrix" with "HealthConnect". At least they dropped that name and used "NeHTA" instead. Like previous versions, the people involved are probably just about to a point where they realize what they do NOT know, and its getting a bit scary. Out of the last version we learnt that that "It's a strategy for change management" - what will the current reincarnation tell us about eHealth?? Real workable practical solutions are being ignored, any head of steam that is spotted is rapidly doused, and the lack of domain knowledge, practical experience, consultation and openness is breathtaking. Snomed-CT licensing is a bright point, but internally a lack of understanding of what they have is a risk. The technology choices proffered seem to be all in the "not ready for prime time" category, while anything proven to work is just way too unfashionable to be seen around any ritzy boardroom table. I think what is needed is real market forces, not some paternalistic cashed up monocracy that distorts the market so consultant's can make a killing. The money poured into EHealth by government over the last 10 years has done very little good, and has probably done a lot of harm. I am sure there will be some sleepless nights ahead in the ivory tower. The schedules they have "set" themselves would try the patience of most politicians. A waterfall approach to the problem is doomed to failure. -- Best regards, Andrew mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Andrew McIntyre Buderim Gastroenterology Centre www.buderimgastro.com.au PH: 07 54455055 FAX: 54455047 _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
