Comments on Adam Cresswell “Self-interest rules in Premier's plan”, 9/04/2010, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/self-interest-rules-in-premiers-plan/story-e6frg6zo-1225851594480
It appears unfortunately that Adam Cresswell's short piece is so short of real analysis.
Obviously it appears that Adam Cresswell is for a big highly Centralised Canberra controlled health system which would be bond to fail if the experience of the past two years or so serves any purposes.
Adam Cresswell is so quick to criticise the Brumby plan organised in a month or so for lacking of detail, but is presumably much more comfortable to the fact of the incomplete disorganised Rudd plan after two years in the making.
The 50-50 model resolves the funding and costs issues altogether. It also makes it clear who is responsible for any issues in providing health services, that is squarely the States. It deserves much more analysis than Adam Cresswell has poorly done.
If Victoria is efficient in providing health services, why should it hand over to Commonwealth, a proven failed service provider? The Victoria health system is not broken. Most of the unmet needs can arguably attributed to the lack of adequate funding from the Commonwealth. So what is the case for Commonwealth to take an efficient provider?
It begs belief how Adam Cresswell can so casually dismiss an alternative health plan in such a short and empty piece devoid of any analysis?
Isn’t better that we have some competition on plans for reforming the health system? Isn’t better that the nation is not fall into hostage of Rudd’s confrontational threat to the States? Where is Rudd’s earlier claim for a cooperative federation?
Why is Adam Cresswell so undemocratic?
Adam Cresswell probably needs to go back to school to get some sense and sensibility.