Oliver and Tim

"Reading between the lines of David's blog, I think that he wants *his* 
strategy. He is
not alone. Every woman, man and her/his dog has their own take on the One True 
Strategy."

Please read my blog properly..I want a consultative, involved, inclusive 
strategy to be
developed and I don't know what it should say..that's why I put all the 
material up - so
all can think about it and form a view for the day when we all have our say..

Kindly don't put words in my mouth - and please just note what I say.

 From the March 11 Open Letter to Mr Abbott.

"I believe this is a major policy failure of the present Government and will 
have
electoral consequences unless addressed promptly with a coherent, inclusive and 
properly
funded National Health IT Strategy in conjunction with an appropriate Business 
Plan and
Implementation Strategy. Neither NEHTA nor the newly re-formed Australian Health
Information Council appear to be cognisant of and focussed upon the excess 
costs and
suffering inaction is causing. Action is required promptly."

Just one example.

Also - as I have said - I think local and focussed - in the right standards 
environment
may be the go..but I am not sure - If you want to provide input I am happy to 
publish it
on the blog. If you have a vision etc - type it up and I will publish and give 
you full
credit.

Oliver - the problem with all the previous stuff was, in part at least, a lack 
of
inclusiveness and real consultation...Some how the  same people were doing the 
same things
on the same committees endlessly and nothing changed.

Up to you all to say what should happen next.

Cheers

David.

 ----
 Dr David G More MB, PhD, FACHI
 Phone +61-2-9438-2851 Fax +61-2-9906-7038
 Skype Username : davidgmore
 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 HealthIT Blog - www.aushealthit.blogspot.com


On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 19:23:52 +1000, Tim Churches wrote:
> Oliver Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> David More wrote:
>>
>>> 3. I also agree with Tim about the risks of the grand plan..we need
>>>
>> some organising
>>> principles and direction and then to get on with it - Strategy Lite
>>>
>> maybe..but we need
>>> some clear sensible frameworks etc. The strategic vacuum approach has
>>>
>> not been seen to
>>> work.
>>>
>> Are you saying that a strategic vacuum persists despite the efforts and 
>> reports of all
those committees and reports that Ken Harvey listed?  If all those
>> committees and reports did not fill the strategic vacuum, what *were* they 
>> doing or
what did they think they were doing?
>>
>
> Reading between the lines of David's blog, I think that he wants *his* 
> strategy. He is
not alone. Every woman, man and her/his dog has their own take on the
> One True Strategy.
>
> That's OK, let us all have our own National Strategies, and let us all put 
> them on our
personal blogs which John Howrad's government is going to provide us
> with. But in the meantime, rather more of us need to get on with the 
> nitty-gritty.
Nitty-gritty? Writing better software, writing better training documents,
> sitting around in really boring (virtual, I hope) committee meetings 
> developing data
encoding standards, pouring over SNOMED CT to create useful subsets,
> creating a sufficiently complete list of medicines, defining a standard 
> method for
secure messaging transport - you know, really dull stuff like that. You
> never know, one of those Strategies might decide that boring stuff like that 
> is actually
needed.
>
> Tim C
>
> __________ NOD32 2308 (20070604) Information __________
>
> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk

Reply via email to