Comments on Milanda Rout and Sid Maher “John Brumby dares PM Kevin Rudd on health”, 14/04/2010, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/politics/john-brumby-dares-pm-kevin-rudd-on-health/story-e6frgczf-1225853393039
If Rudd is serious on health reform and good governance and better health outcomes, he should be prepared to accept the Brumby plan as the base plan, with a provision that the federal will decide to take over a State's in public hospitals if it failed to meet agreed performance criteria.
That surely is better than his own plan and will produce a much better outcome, not only because Canberra is not better positioned for administering hospitals, but also to make the funding formula and responsibilities clear.
It is difficult to see or understand how a federal administered health can produce better outcomes. By all likelihood it will be inferior and worsen the nation's health.
Besides, the Brumby plan should also include a provision that on a bilateral funding arrangement any side (a state or the federal) wishes to increase its funding for health for that state the other side should match by at least a certain proportion (say, less than 100% but greater than 30%) to deal with particular needs.