I write in response to the blog comments following release of the letter to the PM.
In regard to whether or not to make the letter to the PM public – We certainly were of two minds. The BCA letter had been made public and it was the view of the last meeting of the CeH (referred to in the letter) that our support for the BCA position should be made widely known. We did delay its release and sought advice from participants prior to release. The view was that it must be made known to the members of the organisations involved. With so many of those we thought it was tantamount to being made public and so we did that. If there had been some indication from the PM’s office that they would prefer to enter into private discussions then we certainly would have respected that and in any event meant no disrespect by its release. We believe it is about building political support from the broader community which surely is helpful for such an important issue and when so much money is involved.
In regard to the reference to NEHTA: There is now a published NEHTA plan with measureable milestones. This is what has been asked for by David and contributors to the blog for a long time. There is also evidence of the Jurisdictions talking together and aligning better than they have in the past. These are worthy steps forward which deserve recognition – which is what the letter did. I do accept there is a level of frustration around the pace of progress.
In response to questions about the constitution and authority of the Coalition: As described in the letter to the PM, the Coalition formed to improve the strength and coherence of the health system’s voice on e-health issues. It is a loose coalition and is not legally constituted. To do so would have precluded a number of the organisations from participating. There is no elected spokesperson that can speak on behalf of all those organisations. More information is provided at www.ceh.net.au
What happened in relation to the letter was that at the last meeting of the Coalition (held 1st December) which was convened by HISA and well attended, there was consensus that a letter should be sent to the PM prior to the COAG meeting which was to be held on the 7th of December. A small group undertook to write the letter based on the discussions that had taken place at the meeting, to distribute it for comment and then to allow organisations to withdraw from the list for the letter if they felt they were not in a position to support it for whatever reason (one did).
This is what was done and why the letter talks about the consensus at the meeting. Because of the time frame there was not a lot of time for a different approach. It should be said however that there was strong support for both the action and the letter from the many that did respond on behalf of their organisations.
Michael Legg,
President HISA
0 comments:
Post a Comment