Tom Bowden wrote:
I have been expecting NEHTA to bowl in and take overall responsibility for making things change, Robert says (and I have heard other NEHTA staff echo this), that they take no responsibility for actual change happening or the lack of any change to date and that they exist therefore to develop technical specifications and architectures in the hope that they will be implemented. If this is the case, who does have responsibility for leading the transition?
I notice that in the replies so far to your message, Tom, that none of us has yet been able to provide an answer to this important question of yours. I wonder whether there is any answer to it out there in governmentland or bureaucratland.
I still cannot believe that such ambiguity exists.
For some reason Australia, by contrast with New Zealand, seems often to suffer from a dreadful paralysis. I have often wondered whether this is caused mainly by the even larger geography than New Zealand's, our ridiculous State/Federal disjunctions and jurisdictional fights or by something in the Australian character. Whatever the cause, I have often admired New Zealand's ability to just get on and implement changes in its health system (acknowledging that some of them have turned out to be experiments that failed).
-- Oliver Frank, general practitioner 255 North East Road, Hampstead Gardens, South Australia 5086 Phone 08 8261 1355 Fax 08 8266 5149 Mobile 0407 181 683 _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
