<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: NHHRC report out</title>
	<atom:link href="http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/07/27/nhhrc-report-out/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/07/27/nhhrc-report-out/</link>
	<description>Life, Culture and Politics from BrisVegas</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 05:08:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: johndaintree</title>
		<link>http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/07/27/nhhrc-report-out/#comment-147389</link>
		<dc:creator>johndaintree</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2009 11:04:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://larvatusprodeo.net/?p=9147#comment-147389</guid>
		<description>I think the self-imposed constraint on government expenditure growth  is silly, but there are a number of cuts that could be made.
Trade offices could go. They don&#039;t seem to work.  Most rural &amp; industry subsidies don&#039;t make much difference.User charges could go up a bit eg the $30 for general beneficiaries for pharmaceuticals could go to $35. Reduce private school subsidies as mentioned. Get rid of benefits for the rich retired like the health care card. Some benefits could be converted to tax rebates. (I know its a fiddle, but silly promises require creative accounting to get out of). Lot&#039;s can be done on tax side. Higher alcohol &amp; tobacco taxes.   Cut into super tax benefits. Get rid of tax concessions for cars.  It should also be possible to cut a lot of state costs by having uniform food, labelling, consumer, OH&amp;S etc regulations</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the self-imposed constraint on government expenditure growth  is silly, but there are a number of cuts that could be made.<br />
Trade offices could go. They don&#8217;t seem to work.  Most rural &amp; industry subsidies don&#8217;t make much difference.User charges could go up a bit eg the $30 for general beneficiaries for pharmaceuticals could go to $35. Reduce private school subsidies as mentioned. Get rid of benefits for the rich retired like the health care card. Some benefits could be converted to tax rebates. (I know its a fiddle, but silly promises require creative accounting to get out of). Lot&#8217;s can be done on tax side. Higher alcohol &amp; tobacco taxes.   Cut into super tax benefits. Get rid of tax concessions for cars.  It should also be possible to cut a lot of state costs by having uniform food, labelling, consumer, OH&amp;S etc regulations</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Humphreys</title>
		<link>http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/07/27/nhhrc-report-out/#comment-147388</link>
		<dc:creator>John Humphreys</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2009 07:01:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://larvatusprodeo.net/?p=9147#comment-147388</guid>
		<description>Plan to increase marginal tax by 8.5% on low-income workers

http://blog.libertarian.org.au/2009/07/28/plan-to-increase-marginal-tax-by-8-5/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Plan to increase marginal tax by 8.5% on low-income workers</p>
<p><a href="http://blog.libertarian.org.au/2009/07/28/plan-to-increase-marginal-tax-by-8-5/" rel="nofollow">http://blog.libertarian.org.au/2009/07/28/plan-to-increase-marginal-tax-by-8-5/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jarrah</title>
		<link>http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/07/27/nhhrc-report-out/#comment-147387</link>
		<dc:creator>Jarrah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2009 02:03:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://larvatusprodeo.net/?p=9147#comment-147387</guid>
		<description>As always, BBB, well said.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As always, BBB, well said.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sg</title>
		<link>http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/07/27/nhhrc-report-out/#comment-147386</link>
		<dc:creator>sg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 19:35:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://larvatusprodeo.net/?p=9147#comment-147386</guid>
		<description>When I was last in Oz (3 years ago), dental, optical and physio insurance that covered all but 20% of most treatments was $15 a month for an individual. So I think the 0.75% increase in the levy will more than cover it, especially when one considers that dentists being paid on the public purse tend not to overtreat. In fact, I suspect that the 0.75% increase is a bit of a cash grab...

To square the circle we have: productivity gains (being discussed much in the NHS at the moment); improved public health investment in the short term (think of Needle/syringe programs as a classic example of spending now to save later); rationalisation of the state/federal divide so there is less double-spending on these programs; and ditching the private health rebate. Strengthening the PBAC to pre-Howard govt levels would help; greater investment in public R&amp;D (think of the CSL development of the HPV Vaccine as an example). There are potentially large gains from people dying at home, better social care spending and more efficient aged care/health sector interaction. Better geriatric medicine in general is a good way to save - abolishing or tightening up the rules on benzodiazepines alone would have significant benefits for A&amp;E wards, for example. Also, attacking inequalities which have large downstream effects in secondary care (e.g. improving diabetes management in poor people, to prevent their clogging up  A&amp;E with avoidable admissions) is another easy way to control costs. All these types of interventions reduce costs while improving patient care.

Also, the idea that healthcare costs should always increase or should increase at greater than the rate of economic growth is not necessarily true, but depends a lot on the way in which the growth occurs (they grow much faster in the US than here, for example); and all this ageing population stuff is a little overrated in my view.

Michael2, when I worked in a hospital I didn&#039;t meet patients every week, so I would be sacked in your model. And yet in just 2 years I achieved:
- a computerised system for methadone dispensing which greatly reduced the risk of costly adverse events
- a direct data entry system for routine clinical visits which significantly reduced paper-based data entry costs (i.e. other administrative staff costs) and reduced the  clinical staffs administrative burden
- major improvements in the ability of staff to access pathology results immediately on their computer rather than having to wait minutes or hours to view them
- a computerised system for monitoring excluded clients&#039; access to the clinic, with significant safety gains for all staff.

Not to mention my involvement in every aspect of public health planning, and of course all the reactive stuff I had to do every day. There is very little fat left to cut in the Australian public hospital system, and administrative staff work just as hard as clinical staff to ensure the smooth functioning of a very complex system. This administrative/clinical divide doesn&#039;t exist in practice and we have to think a lot smarter than &quot;no cuts to frontline staff!&quot; if we want to contain costs and improve health in a modern hospital system.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When I was last in Oz (3 years ago), dental, optical and physio insurance that covered all but 20% of most treatments was $15 a month for an individual. So I think the 0.75% increase in the levy will more than cover it, especially when one considers that dentists being paid on the public purse tend not to overtreat. In fact, I suspect that the 0.75% increase is a bit of a cash grab&#8230;</p>
<p>To square the circle we have: productivity gains (being discussed much in the NHS at the moment); improved public health investment in the short term (think of Needle/syringe programs as a classic example of spending now to save later); rationalisation of the state/federal divide so there is less double-spending on these programs; and ditching the private health rebate. Strengthening the PBAC to pre-Howard govt levels would help; greater investment in public R&amp;D (think of the CSL development of the HPV Vaccine as an example). There are potentially large gains from people dying at home, better social care spending and more efficient aged care/health sector interaction. Better geriatric medicine in general is a good way to save &#8211; abolishing or tightening up the rules on benzodiazepines alone would have significant benefits for A&amp;E wards, for example. Also, attacking inequalities which have large downstream effects in secondary care (e.g. improving diabetes management in poor people, to prevent their clogging up  A&amp;E with avoidable admissions) is another easy way to control costs. All these types of interventions reduce costs while improving patient care.</p>
<p>Also, the idea that healthcare costs should always increase or should increase at greater than the rate of economic growth is not necessarily true, but depends a lot on the way in which the growth occurs (they grow much faster in the US than here, for example); and all this ageing population stuff is a little overrated in my view.</p>
<p>Michael2, when I worked in a hospital I didn&#8217;t meet patients every week, so I would be sacked in your model. And yet in just 2 years I achieved:<br />
- a computerised system for methadone dispensing which greatly reduced the risk of costly adverse events<br />
- a direct data entry system for routine clinical visits which significantly reduced paper-based data entry costs (i.e. other administrative staff costs) and reduced the  clinical staffs administrative burden<br />
- major improvements in the ability of staff to access pathology results immediately on their computer rather than having to wait minutes or hours to view them<br />
- a computerised system for monitoring excluded clients&#8217; access to the clinic, with significant safety gains for all staff.</p>
<p>Not to mention my involvement in every aspect of public health planning, and of course all the reactive stuff I had to do every day. There is very little fat left to cut in the Australian public hospital system, and administrative staff work just as hard as clinical staff to ensure the smooth functioning of a very complex system. This administrative/clinical divide doesn&#8217;t exist in practice and we have to think a lot smarter than &#8220;no cuts to frontline staff!&#8221; if we want to contain costs and improve health in a modern hospital system.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Russell</title>
		<link>http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/07/27/nhhrc-report-out/#comment-147385</link>
		<dc:creator>Russell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 12:29:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://larvatusprodeo.net/?p=9147#comment-147385</guid>
		<description>When looking at government revenue, why not look at getting rid of the big tax exemptions used by the wealthy? Look at trusts, capital gains tax ... all that stuff - billions could be raised.
I was pleased about the dental plan, but also suspicious because I don&#039;t think there are many dentists with loads of time to see more patients. Maybe dental technicians will become providers of &#039;basic&#039; dental care ... sort of like nurse practitioners?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When looking at government revenue, why not look at getting rid of the big tax exemptions used by the wealthy? Look at trusts, capital gains tax &#8230; all that stuff &#8211; billions could be raised.<br />
I was pleased about the dental plan, but also suspicious because I don&#8217;t think there are many dentists with loads of time to see more patients. Maybe dental technicians will become providers of &#8216;basic&#8217; dental care &#8230; sort of like nurse practitioners?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Francis Xavier Holden</title>
		<link>http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/07/27/nhhrc-report-out/#comment-147384</link>
		<dc:creator>Francis Xavier Holden</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 12:06:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://larvatusprodeo.net/?p=9147#comment-147384</guid>
		<description>michael2 - getting rid of &quot;administrators&quot; is a favourite throw away line of many.

I&#039;m curious as to how many people, like yourself, want their favourite heroic heart/brain/kidney surgeon/nurse spending hours filling in the spreadsheets to send to government departments so that &quot;performance can be monitored&quot;, &quot;clinical safety standards upheld&quot;, &quot;accountability&quot; for taxpayers monies and &quot;transparency&quot; throughput or survival rates all can be documented and explained.

No10 is a must.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>michael2 &#8211; getting rid of &#8220;administrators&#8221; is a favourite throw away line of many.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m curious as to how many people, like yourself, want their favourite heroic heart/brain/kidney surgeon/nurse spending hours filling in the spreadsheets to send to government departments so that &#8220;performance can be monitored&#8221;, &#8220;clinical safety standards upheld&#8221;, &#8220;accountability&#8221; for taxpayers monies and &#8220;transparency&#8221; throughput or survival rates all can be documented and explained.</p>
<p>No10 is a must.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael2</title>
		<link>http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/07/27/nhhrc-report-out/#comment-147383</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael2</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 11:13:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://larvatusprodeo.net/?p=9147#comment-147383</guid>
		<description>Here&#039;s how to save a few bucks to pay for some much needed reforms:

1. Organise a patient-free day (like they have pupil-free days at school).
2. Get all the hospital staff together in the car park.
3. Ask for a show of hands over who has worked with a patient in the last seven days.
4. Dismiss those who don&#039;t put their hands up.
5. Have a vote among the core staff over which cooks, cleaners and pay staff they should invite back.
6. Ban anyone with the word facilitator or anyone who has ever used the word &#039;client&#039; from coming withing a mile of the hospital.
7. Fine all managers 10c for every form that clinical staff have to fill in.
8. Send the bill for all alcohol-related illness to the brewers and Hotels Association.
9. Ditto for tobacco and fast food.
10. Abolish all taxpayers subsidies for private insurance companies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here&#8217;s how to save a few bucks to pay for some much needed reforms:</p>
<p>1. Organise a patient-free day (like they have pupil-free days at school).<br />
2. Get all the hospital staff together in the car park.<br />
3. Ask for a show of hands over who has worked with a patient in the last seven days.<br />
4. Dismiss those who don&#8217;t put their hands up.<br />
5. Have a vote among the core staff over which cooks, cleaners and pay staff they should invite back.<br />
6. Ban anyone with the word facilitator or anyone who has ever used the word &#8216;client&#8217; from coming withing a mile of the hospital.<br />
7. Fine all managers 10c for every form that clinical staff have to fill in.<br />
8. Send the bill for all alcohol-related illness to the brewers and Hotels Association.<br />
9. Ditto for tobacco and fast food.<br />
10. Abolish all taxpayers subsidies for private insurance companies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bingo Bango Boingo</title>
		<link>http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/07/27/nhhrc-report-out/#comment-147382</link>
		<dc:creator>Bingo Bango Boingo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 11:05:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://larvatusprodeo.net/?p=9147#comment-147382</guid>
		<description>This &#039;share of GDP&#039; thing is such a red herring.  The fundamental preferences of human beings, increasing wealth and the nature of the modern state basically guarantee increases in public spending relative to GDP.  Forever.  The real battleground is how the money raised through taxation is applied - in re-distributive but sensibly de-centralised and economically rational ways (e.g. neoliberal ideas like education vouchers, or neoliberal-influenced concepts like managed competition in healthcare, etc.) or in dumb ways (e.g. monolithic government bodies, facilities and services).

Going back to the NHHRC report: the inclusion of serious proposals in the shape of the former - i.e. the clearly Scotton-influenced &#039;Medicare Select&#039; - is encouraging.  The long term stance is clearly going to be: competition, consumer choice and getting price signals into the block purchasing of health services.  In many ways the report is a rejection of social democratic ideas about how to deliver healthcare.  So it&#039;s nice to see that even in the midst of the GFC you can still rely on an ALP-commissioned report into health to incorporate elements of the neoliberal agenda.

BBB</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This &#8216;share of GDP&#8217; thing is such a red herring.  The fundamental preferences of human beings, increasing wealth and the nature of the modern state basically guarantee increases in public spending relative to GDP.  Forever.  The real battleground is how the money raised through taxation is applied &#8211; in re-distributive but sensibly de-centralised and economically rational ways (e.g. neoliberal ideas like education vouchers, or neoliberal-influenced concepts like managed competition in healthcare, etc.) or in dumb ways (e.g. monolithic government bodies, facilities and services).</p>
<p>Going back to the NHHRC report: the inclusion of serious proposals in the shape of the former &#8211; i.e. the clearly Scotton-influenced &#8216;Medicare Select&#8217; &#8211; is encouraging.  The long term stance is clearly going to be: competition, consumer choice and getting price signals into the block purchasing of health services.  In many ways the report is a rejection of social democratic ideas about how to deliver healthcare.  So it&#8217;s nice to see that even in the midst of the GFC you can still rely on an ALP-commissioned report into health to incorporate elements of the neoliberal agenda.</p>
<p>BBB</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Labor Outsider</title>
		<link>http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/07/27/nhhrc-report-out/#comment-147381</link>
		<dc:creator>Labor Outsider</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 10:37:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://larvatusprodeo.net/?p=9147#comment-147381</guid>
		<description>Yeah, I don&#039;t think it is realistic to think that the share of government spending could be reduced to entirely meet the short fall, or even half, given that there are other gaps in public spending that probably need to be filled. Taxes will simply have to increase.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, I don&#8217;t think it is realistic to think that the share of government spending could be reduced to entirely meet the short fall, or even half, given that there are other gaps in public spending that probably need to be filled. Taxes will simply have to increase.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert Merkel</title>
		<link>http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/07/27/nhhrc-report-out/#comment-147380</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert Merkel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 10:28:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://larvatusprodeo.net/?p=9147#comment-147380</guid>
		<description>Hmmm.  Even with those cuts, by the sound of it you&#039;d still need more tax revenue in the long term.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmmm.  Even with those cuts, by the sound of it you&#8217;d still need more tax revenue in the long term.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

