Libs promise more doctors

“2. After so many years of supporting a corporate health ideology, can we believe them?” Ms Bresnan said.

“These overnight GP Clinics are welcome, but are only one part of the health system, and can’t replace the value of community health practices like the recently closed Wanniassa.”

From Amanda Bresnan’s media release.

In the first paragraph she accuses the Liberals of supporting a ‘corporate’ health ideology, then in the second paragraph she praises a private health practise while knocking the Liberals Government run clinics.

That’s some lovely logical gymnastics.

Granny said :

If ‘j’ is to be believed …

hahahahahahaha … can’t believe I wrote that!

: D

Granny said :

jakez said :

Still no policy upload. Somebody call Divisional HQ on the number above and ask to speak to the Director.

I vote you do it …. *hehe*

; )

I’m a Party Member, they aren’t going to answer me. They’ll tell me to bugger off and stop causing trouble.

jakez said :

Note that Zed is the one announcing the health policy, not Jacqui… Still no policy upload.

This confirms the stupidity of attempting to run a presidential style election campaign in the ACT.

– GCC see an article in the media discussing Liberal Policy announements
– it has impacts in the health portfolio and media is interested in GCC thoughts
– GCC go to the Liberal website to see what they have announced
– GCC can’t find any information: no media release, no policy documents
– GCC call their spokesperson for health (MLA) for clarification
– GCC don’t get the clarification we are seeking (already covered above)
– we now find out via RiotACT that the Opposition Leader is responsible for the announcement

Just plain stupid.

jakez said :

Still no policy upload. Somebody call Divisional HQ on the number above and ask to speak to the Director.

I vote you do it …. *hehe*

; )

Didn’t Federal Labor promise “GP super clinics” at the last election?

Was Canberra slated to get one (two or three)?

Granny said :

He has a posse of crazies after him, and you are surprised that he had an outburst?
People are human, jakez. Didn’t you ever watch the Waltons?

If RiotACT is so insignificant then why do the local politicians appear to take such an interest?

It would have been easy enough for somebody to upload the document to the website 60 posts ago, or if it is not ready for release just explain why and when it will be.

That is just commonsense.
If ‘j’ is to be believed, it would appear that Simon Corbell is not all that happy with him either. So it cuts both ways, I guess.

1, RiotACT wouldn’t be RiotACT without johnboy getting on his high horse so no I’m not really upset with him.

2, Firstly politicians are wonks as well. Secondly, I didn’t say RiotACT was insignificant, I said that johnboy and RiotACT can’t change the publics apathy. They don’t care about reading the policy. That is just common sense.

3, I absolutely agree with your point on uploading the policy document. I don’t know why it isn’t up there and I think it should be.

Here’s something to stir you guys up a bit. I’ve just received an email of a media release from Zed’s office. ‘ZED ANNOUNCES AFTER HOURS BULK BILLING GP CLINICS IN THE SUBURBS’

http://www.canberraliberals.org.au/html/s02_article/article_view.asp?art_id=338&nav_cat_id=156&nav_top_id=55

Note that Zed is the one announcing the health policy, not Jacqui… Still no policy upload. Somebody call Divisional HQ on the number above and ask to speak to the Director.

Gungahlin Al said :

Jonathon emailed Jackie asking for details.

Have to correct you Alan. I actually phoned Jacqui’s office on 62050133.

The individual who answered the phone (female) could not and was not able to clarify the question we asked. I was told that Helen (Jacqui’s advsor) would call me back with a response.

Almost 11am the following day I am still waiting to hear.

It isn’t as if Jacqui’s office isnt aware of the GCC media release. A copy was sent to both Katy Gallagher and Jacqui Burke. The media release obviously prompted Katy to send the council an update via our web site (as Alan has previously mentioned).

We weren’t asking for anything other than a simple clarification. Unfortuately the lack of information (and poor communication from Jacqui’s office) does make it appear that the Liberal policy was made on the run.

My previous dealings with Jacqui’s office (in particular directly with Jacqui) for information have generally been good.

He has a posse of crazies after him, and you are surprised that he had an outburst?

People are human, jakez. Didn’t you ever watch the Waltons?

: )

If RiotACT is so insignificant then why do the local politicians appear to take such an interest?

It would have been easy enough for somebody to upload the document to the website 60 posts ago, or if it is not ready for release just explain why and when it will be.

That is just commonsense.

If ‘j’ is to be believed, it would appear that Simon Corbell is not all that happy with him either. So it cuts both ways, I guess.

Gungahlin Al said :

Jonathon emailed Jackie asking for details.

lol, good luck with that.

Jonathon emailed Jackie asking for details. We waited for most of the day before issuing our media release. It meant we missed the bulk of the media cycle, but we felt it important to give them a chance to respond and clarify our concerns.

PS: the house on Grand Designs was stunning…

Sorry for the three post something something (whatever people say on this site)

Somebody call up ACT HQ on 02 6273 5155 and ask them when the policy will be up on the website. Report back on the answer (or non answer).

Now as for my own thoughts on the matter at hand. It would be good if they put the policy up as soon as it goes public (I’ll say up on the same day as a decent buffer). I think that’s fair for all concerned.

Leaving it longer than that is pushing it a bit but johnboys outburst here is not justified. If this is how he reacts to (so far) a days wait on the detailed policy document, I’d hate to see what would happen if somebody released a policy that he didn’t like. I think his head would explode.

We’ll see what happens. The election is October 18 so there is plenty of time to decipher the details and it is the actual policy positions of the Parties that I am most interested in, not when they put their documents up on the website (incidentally you’ll never meet the man that does that anyway). The time it takes to put it up is a consideration by all means, but not nearly the greatest consideration, especially when we are talking about a day. I would say the same thing about the ALP, the Greens, or the Liberty and Democracy Party.

If it’s still not up this afternoon though, I may feel differently 😉

johnboy said :

Been announced. Not published.

Care to point to its location on the Canberra Liberals website teepee?

Even a media release?

Zed once again thinking he’s playing a clever media strategy and coming across as a straw man.

I’m not one to defend liberal laziness but I think it’s very cute that you think you are a player. Get in your car, drive to Kambah, park your car in a random street, go door to door and find out how many people have even heard of RiotACT.

It is smart strategy because us wonks are a minority of a minority. If you can somehow successfully get ‘the public’ to demand comprehensive details then I will honestly applaud you and apologise. But let’s not pretend.

;o) Now I am definitely reminded of stakeholder groups when johnboy threatens to report people to the electoral commission for disagreeing with him and questioining his anti-Lib stance in a thread. Entertaining.

Tom Tom may be right that johnboy gives curry to all sides. As Tom Tom says if Zed is quasi-nationalising a small part of the system, then that makes him way to the left and puts the electoral spectrum in a right scramble! But then again, if there is some dysfunction in the system then maybe some Canberrans wouldn’t mind a bit more govt-backed services – even if it does see Zed branded a socialist. Some people are pretty pleased to see some fresh ideas and the Opposition opening up the debate.

tom-tom said :

if you want to accuse johnboy of bias in what he runs; actually take look through the old posts. i personally think he’s biased as can be; but in the opposite way to how you see it; now to me that suggests that both of us are so far to the left (right) that even the centre looks right (left).

Possibly the nicest thing anyone here’s ever said.

It means that their policies have been observed for the last seven years, and their discussion papers are up on departmental sites, and once again you ignore the huge chunk of the argument that is inconvenient to you.

The document you link to has been around for months and is not what was laughably “announced” today.

Now Teepee if you’re going to be such a flagrant shill for the party I suggest you disclose, or I can send your details off to the electoral commission?

What does it mean that “The Government remains the government.” That sounds like thou shalt not criticise or question?

Why is a 21 discussion paper “voluminous” and why is this a credible policy when there isn’t a promise in the document and no estimate even of cost. I would like to hear why this is an exemplar of great policy.

Again I’d love Johnboys appraisal of the document on the Lib website which he pretends isn’t there http://www.canberraliberals.org.au/files/QCCAF083MN/Bulk%20Billing%20GPs%20for%20Our%20Suburbs.pdf

if you want to accuse johnboy of bias in what he runs; actually take look through the old posts. i personally think he’s biased as can be; but in the opposite way to how you see it; now to me that suggests that both of us are so far to the left (right) that even the centre looks right (left).

oh and i think you’ll find there are few ‘election policy’ documents on the labor site is because they’re in govt; if they have a good idea they can just implement it, for instance the 300 mill investment in health infrastructure is not a promise, not a policy but an action, comparing this to vague statements on the lib page isn’t fair; again with the apples and oranges.

oh and on a side note i think the ‘magic wand’ is nationalising the health system, making it govt run and free for everyone; i realise thats not realistic but hey if zed can live in a fantasy land where nobody wants any details worked out; why cant i?

Irrespective of the debate about whether this constitutes a policy or not, I’d offer these comments:

The Opposition also plans to offer interstate doctors grants of $75,000 to relocate to Canberra.

Um, where is this interstate surplus of doctors that this is going to appeal to? Doctors already can basically pick and choose where they set up shop, and do so for a multitude of reasons apart from money. $75,000 would barely cover the removal costs of shifting a house and practice to Canberra including the lost income during the winding down of a previous practice and the starting up of a new one.

Canberra-based doctors will also be offered financial incentives to set up their own practices.

Why would we want this? I want my doctor to be a doctor, not a HR manager, finance manager, office manager, bookkeeper, stores clerk, cleaner and everything else that goes with running your own small business. My doctor should be worrying about his patients and not the vagaries of liability insurance, taxation, workplace relations, leases, health regulations, superannuation guarantees, etc. I also want my doctor to be able to work reasonable hours with the opportunity to take regular vacations.

The Government remains the government.

Their policy documents are voluminous, and the education policy change has been discussed at length with a link from here to the discussion paper.

You’re not arguing like an honest player here. Have a care as to how that reflects on those you argue for.

Fair point, all policies should be on the website. But like the ohtr riotacters say “What is wrong with announcing a prospective or soon-to-be-released policy? I don’t see how this could be considered ‘lying’ – as opposed to – say, actually promising something and and disregarding that promise altogether (no school closures, for example).”

The Libs have a policy up on one of their health centres, but not the other three. http://www.canberraliberals.org.au

No johnboy comment on the one that is up – so have you read it? What’s your appraisal, where is it wrong-headed?

But I don’t see any series of Labor policy documents here http://www.actlabor.com.au/policy.html The Labor website has a single document to brush over all policy areas – fair enough – and there are some general principles, but no dollars and cents.

There is no Barr document on raising the school leaving age. That was also announced today and not backed up with a policy promise. I don’t think that’s a sin, but why the double standard?

Again I guess the question is why does johnboy run the double standards. One day Liberal delay over health centres = incompetent Liberals and johnboy fit, four months Stanhope delay over health centres = no comment. It tells me something

ant said :

There’s no magic wand to generate doctors.

Damn. There goes the Liberal policy.

teepee, to use your own phrase; comparing a minister not having the time to explain a policy to a community group (pretty sure ministers are busy people, oh and she has now set up a meeting to do this) to the leader of the opposition announcing an uncosted and very vague policy (without bothering to put up any details for closer study) is like comparing apples to oranges. doesn’t work.

gotta agree with johnboy on this one,

Things like this are what happens when the work expereince kid is running the show.

There’s no magic wand to generate doctors. We don’t have enough. Visit a hospital in the region, and it’s staffed (doctor-wise) by foreign doctors. and luckily enough for us, they’ve jumped through the hoops, done the extra training, done the supervised service, and are really good, dedicated doctors.

We need to train more of these, there’s the problem. and we need to halt the desparate growth in population. We have all the shortages in everything, except babies and immigrants.

I don’t want it mailled to me.

I want it made PUBLIC so EVERYONE who is interested can see it.

The way that every party in every jurisdiction conducts public debates as opposed to advertising campaigns.

A party that can’t manage a website, IMHO, is unfit to hold any seats in any assembly.

Now how are we meant to compare a secret document (with some accompanying media drips) to policy?

That’s right we can’t.

Some people are stupid and taken in, others get angry.

The Liberal party used to stand for just a little bit more than duping the credulous.

I’m not running for election – I presume that’s a vent at Zed.;o)

That’s shrill rhetoric, but doesn’t answer the question why (1) on one hand Liberal promises don’t count and it’s criminal if their document is not emailed to you in 24 hours, but (2) on the other hand you are not equally angry-ant on a four month old Labor budget item that is still unexplained. In the Commonwealth every budget measure has a media release to go with it that spells out full details. Would be nice if the ACT Government followed suit. Maybe not enough staff to do this for evry promise, but there should be more info published on the biggies.

There is also the unanswered issue of how the Lib and Labor policies compare – what is capital and what is recurrent. Again johnboy not interested in that detail. I make the mistake of assuming most riotacters are public servants like me. This reminds me of stakeholder liaison groups I once ran in the public service, where it was always the least cluely groups who hop on high horses, talk rhetoric and run from specific discussion.

Stop lying, stop hoping you can steal an election with slick ads and mirrors, and I’ll stop being angry.

Release the policy if you want to talk about the subject.

What we’re seeing is an electoral tilt being run as a re-packaged confidence trick.

Golly johnboy in angry mood tonight. As I noted the Labor $18m policy has been out weeks or months but Gungahlin Community Council can’t get details and have only this evening Katy Gallagher at last promised Al a meeting by email to explain some details (maybe that buys time to work the details out and fair enough). Johnboy is kinda ignoring this, but spinning his head in circles because a question asked of the Libs today wasn’t answered. Funny how there is a different attitude to similar slowness by the parties to stump up full details. If the Labor details on how the $18mill will be spent are out there I’d like to see it.

Looks vague in the budget. Only $ for construction, not clear what services will be offered and no funding to staff it. See http://www.treasury.act.gov.au/budget

Ahh, so today was just a vision of a future policy?

You’re describing an illusionary facsimile of the policy development process.

But there is no policy yet, just a media stunt.

Glad you cleared that up.

What is wrong with announcing a prospective or soon-to-be-released policy? I don’t see how this could be considered ‘lying’ – as opposed to – say, actually promising something and and disregarding that promise altogether (no school closures, for example).

deezagood said :

Wow Johnboy – that is harsh. Maybe, just maybe, the Libs have learned from the ‘Metooism’ demonstrated by KRudd’s team and are avoiding formally releasing their policies until the election has been called …

Fine, so don’t “announce” policy if you don’t want to.

But people who say they’re doing something they’re not are liars.

yeh but given the amount of att ention most people pay to politics it will probably work.

Wow Johnboy – that is harsh. Maybe, just maybe, the Libs have learned from the ‘Metooism’ demonstrated by KRudd’s team and are avoiding formally releasing their policies until the election has been called …

teepee said :

If the paper is quoting from a policy, then I do tend to believe them. Not sure what johnboy’s denial issue is?

And where has this policy been published teepee?

It has not.

The paper might have had an advance copy, or they might have settled for an interview to get the scoop.

But the policy has not been published. It is not public. It is, to date, garbled wishy washy promises by self-evident incompetents who are either unwilling or unable to publish their policy.

Grand Designs – I’m off too then! Can’t afford foxtel at moment, so ABC has to make do.

Yes indeed teepee – precisely the nature of our discussions at our meetings to date – room to grow as our population races up to 100,000. But there is only so much we can fit on a media release ourselves…
Now I’m bowing our of this discussion as Grand Designs is on! 🙂

I’d suggest our Meet the Candidates evening in October may see the topic raised…

Private would be good. But if John James is collapsing some services, then maybe there are critical mass issues? Perhaps a good idea would be to start with a concept that is short of a hospital, but to start with a land reserve from government that allows for scalability if and when the economics stack up for investors.

If the paper is quoting from a policy, then I do tend to believe them. Not sure what johnboy’s denial issue is?

“By the way the Gungahlin Council idea of a full day hospital with surgery and specialists sounds super dooper expensive. Where would the money for that come from?”
Clearly it would be a semi-commercial arrangement, and the numbers you are proposing are way out of the ball park of what we’re envisaging.

That is good to hear Gallagher coming up with the details. What would be nice would be to hold a purpose specific meeting, put both sides in the room and let the audience see how well the details stack up. They could also bring copies of their policies with them for some added accountability – always nice to have in bottom drawer after the election is over.

Ahh, so an article in the paper is the Canberra Liberals idea of a policy now?

That’s even more laughable.

Here is the article http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/libs-poll-pledge-to-solve-gp-crisis/1247705.aspx

Not hard to find. There are several pledges in here and all have exact numbers on them. I won’t bother pasting them because you can just follow the link. The journo writes it up as a binding policy commitment. I don’t see how johnboy sustains the “no policy” allegation.

I don’t think that is “vague ideas” when there are hard numbers. Vague to me is when you have a government say that they “might” raise the school leaving age or they “might” build light rail if the feds find the money. I would hope that the moderator is as even handed about that kind of kite flying? But I don’t expect him to label the govt “pathetic”, but it would help to read the paper sometimes.

Oh – and just got an email from Minister Gallagher this arvo suggesting we get together to discuss their proposal as made in the ACT budget…

I’d love to see even a media release.

Good points raised here folks.

Teepee – there isn’t anywhere to rent in Gungahlin. In fact floor space is so think on the ground (‘scuse pun) that rents are apparently higher than in Civic. So any spending discussed for Gungahlin will inevitably include construction.

We don’t begrudge other areas facilities they need, and in fact we regularly lobby the government on Canberra-wide issues.

As a re-read of our article will show, our concern is that both the incumbents and the wannabes appear to be making policy on the run, rather than proposing holistic well-considered solutions. And there is no excuse for it. Lib and Labor candidates and incumbents regularly attend our meetings, and they should all know that we remain available to all comers to discuss solutions. We are pragmatic enough to know that everything we ask for may not be forthcoming, but we also believe that the way to work with a community is to sit down and talk these things through.

Any of us who work in the departments around this town would be well aware of the perils of policy on the run…

As JB has been saying – policy needs to run deeper than a media release.

“Amateur politicians”? Would you prefer the community councils to be run by professional politician? Been there done that.

Been announced. Not published.

Care to point to its location on the Canberra Liberals website teepee?

Even a media release?

Zed once again thinking he’s playing a clever media strategy and coming across as a straw man.

Have they said there is no policy document? Where did they say that? I thought the Canberra Times said that a policy had been released?

A policy that was announced, but not published.

So at the moment there are vague ideas, but no policy.

It’s frankly pathetic.

That’s a strange comment. I thought this debate is all about a policy that has been announced today? Something funny in the tea there johnboy.

By the way the Gungahlin Council idea of a full day hospital with surgery and specialists sounds super dooper expensive. Where would the money for that come from? Labor are saying that a Women’s maternity hospital development will cost $90 million, so that gives a sense of size of cost for these operations (and that would be costed by bureaucrats, not by political party monkeys). If we consider the cost of a small day hospital for Gungahlin it could be maybe $200 to $300 million. On that basis both Lib and Labor promises for Gungahlin fall well short of the highbar being set by the Gungahlin lobby. I understand the value of lobbying for your own suburbs, but it’s easier to get a good result by being realistic.

It is true that we have been disappointed on Gungahlin Drive, and it would not surprise me if we were disappointed again.

I have made some valid points. If you want to persist in attacking myself or the council that is your choice, but I do not think you will be doing yourself any favours.

There are far more constructive ways of making a point. I have nothing further to say.

Going to address the absence of any actual policy teepee?

So to be clear, the Gungahlin Council haven’t got answers on the Labor promise which is weeks or months old, but Granny is in a stew because there isn’t an answer yet to a question that was put to the Libs today?

Being told you will get something good only to be disappointed … Sounds like Gungahlin Drive.

Who can say before they finished writing the policy?

So they might even get less than $6 million?

Of course people are going to be concerned. It’s like being finally given something good, only to be told you might not get it after all.

If it is a proposition that will benefit Gungahlin equally then the wise thing to do is to address the very natural concerns of the residents.

If you don’t manage expectations or even reply to a request by a peak community group for more information, you can hardly blame them for being distrustful.

Some would have to get less than others surely? The demand will not be identical in three different locations, unless you were extrordinarily scientific about location.

Sorry it wasn’t me who complained about services going to other parts of Canberra. I think that would be a good thing. Yes Gungahlin is badly serviced on most fronts you can think of, but the problem getting into a GP surgery is a common one around town. It would be nice to be in the kind of job when you can get to the GP during the working day and wait for hours, but that’s a luxury many folk don’t have.

$20 million dollars divided between the three centres. Unless some of them will get less and others more?

It’s one thing to compare apples and oranges and another thing to take pot shots at people who are working their guts out to improve the standard of living in their community.

Labeling people as greedy, and using wedge tactics between Gungahlin and the other parts of Canberra will alienate a lot of people who might otherwise have had some sympathy for your point of view or at least given it a good hearing. It’s just unnecessary and divisive.

PS: Where did the $6.7 million figure come from? If that’s $18m divided by three roughly, then that would confirm the Zed radio this morning that this is about running costs. ie: It’s a spend each and every year, not a one-off construction cost.

Here’s another way to look at the situation – a house might cost say $400,000 to build (including cost of land), but it’s running costs are something much less than that into the future when you add up electricity, water etc. The ratio would of course be very different for a commercial building than for residential (eg: considering staffing costs). But you see the point about apples and oranges … I presume?

Maybe if Zed had a policy we could all understand him better?

If you read the Gungahlin media release you will see they are saying $18 million is for building a centre and not for running it (ie: paying staff). The $18m does not therefore presumably include running costs, like staff salaries.

And if I understand Zed correctly this morning, he was saying his money was for the running costs in a rented premises.

ie: One party is publishing its construction costs and the other publishing running costs – thus apples v oranges.

Does that explanation make the apples and oranges issue easier for you to understand Granny? But I see your point politically. People hear the numbers and compare them outright when they don’t know what the money is going towards.

Gee, $18 million or $6.67 million dollars? That’s a tough choice. Fancy the Gungahlin Community Council advocating for $18 million for Gungahlin. How dare they!

Gee the Gungahlin lobby are being a bit greedy. They are pissed about the idea of the funding being spread across three locations rahter than all being spent in Gungahlin!

With that kind of narrow attitude, it’s little wonder there are some other Canberrans who (unfairly in my view) take issue with investment in GDE.

I heard Zed on radio says that this money was for running GP Super Clinics from leased premises. So I guess that’s maybe the difference between the money that Labor is promising for Gungahlin – is that the construction cost or the running cost? Is the Lib promise definitely all for the running cost and not any construction cost?

I just wonder whether some of the amateur politicians in the community councils are always comparing apples with apples. But to be fair to them it’s also incumbent on both the parties to answer community questions and put the facts out clearly on their policies.

amarooresident said :

The problem with offering grants is that the ACT can never hope to compete financially – we offer $75,000, NSW offers $100,000 QLD offers $125,000 and so on. We don’t have the resources to get into that game for very long.

True – but you need to pay up if you want to poach manpower. GPs are a limited commodity – locally and nationwide – at the moment, so it is bound to hurt the hip pocket to lure the good ones into relocating into an area which is horribly underserviced, such is the ACT. Agreeing to come and work here is in part agreeing to pick up a heavy workload (in a city which is comparatively smaller and therefore less attractive to many). Hence, there needs to be a lot of incentive to pick up and move, particularly if you want to poach good quality practitioners.

The public hospitals are yet to cotton onto the idea that you must pay to attract doctors and pay to retain them. The best the ACT has to offer doctors in the ACT system thus far is parity with NSW, which is vastly behind states such as WA and Qld, who have actively campaigned to recruit and successfully bolstered their numbers as a result. Meanwhile, the ACT has a system which is vastly overstretched, from which many leave every year because the pay’s not competitive with other states, and the work is just too overwhelming – it becomes a vicious circle. Who would want to work in such a system?

I’m really getting the feeling that the Liberals are a bunch of no-hoper yahoos making stuff up as they go along.

Which I respect in a way, but probably wouldn’t vote into government given a chance.

The Gungahlin Community Council has put out the following media release regarding the matter: http://www.gcc.asn.au/News/Territory-Services/liberals-policy-confusion.html

I personally called the office of Jacqui Burke at about 12:30 this afternoon to get a clarification regarding their policy announcement before the GCC put out the media release.

The individual who answered the phone in Jacqui’s office couldn’t give us an answer about whether the policy was “instead of” or “in addition to” government proposed medical centre proposed for Gungahlin.

At time of positing this comment neither Jacqui nor her adviser have got back to us with the clarification we seek.

—
Jonathon Reynolds
Vice President

Gungahlin Community Council Inc
PO Box 260 Gungahlin, ACT 2912

All people are asking is for someone to actually come up with some proposals to fix the problems, rather than telling people there isn’t one and we should count ourselves lucky.

This labour government is sounding awfully like Howard before the last election – “dont you know how good you have it under us?!?”

We can only hope that the public reacts to Stanhope in the same way.

I had heard that Phillip medical centre already offers way more than that to get doctors to sign on.

There was also a country town that offerred significantly more again and still didn’t get a bite. There is a serious lack of doctors around.

On the plus side, at least this idea is trying to do something, instead of just pretneding things are n’t that bad.

On the other hand giving the people something they actually want is a brave, new, heretofore untested idea.

If I dig a hole, put a whole lot of money in the hole, then hire a copywriter to come up with a good title for the hole, I’ve still just put money down a hole.

A good point, but that has zero to do with the list from the last budget. They’re actual programs that are currently being funded, unlike say the Lib’s policy, which is unfunded, pie in the sky, rubbish.

The problem with offering grants is that the ACT can never hope to compete financially – we offer $75,000, NSW offers $100,000 QLD offers $125,000 and so on. We don’t have the resources to get into that game for very long.

I do like the idea of assisting them to set up practice however I would hope that it takes the form of concessions, for example waiving stamp duty or planning fees rather than direct cash.

areaman said :

This is a lot better than any of the crappola the labor party has come up with!

What like $300 Million extra from the last budget for (from the health dept website):

Women and Children’s Hospital at the Canberra Hospital
Adult Mental Health Acute Inpatient Unit
New Community Health Centre/Walk-in Centre at Gungahlin
Secure Adult Mental Health Inpatient Unit
16 new beds ICU/HDU /CCU facility at Calvary Hospital
Digital mammography
Neurosurgery Suite at TCH
Redevelopment of Community Health Centres
16 bed Surgical Assessment and Planning Unit (SAPU)
24 additional beds at TCH
Mental Health Assessment Unit
Skills Development Centre
Mental Health Young Persons’ Unit

So what there is “crappola”?

If I dig a hole, put a whole lot of money in the hole, then hire a copywriter to come up with a good title for the hole, I’ve still just put money down a hole.

This is a lot better than any of the crappola the labor party has come up with!

What like $300 Million extra from the last budget for (from the health dept website):

Women and Children’s Hospital at the Canberra Hospital
Adult Mental Health Acute Inpatient Unit
New Community Health Centre/Walk-in Centre at Gungahlin
Secure Adult Mental Health Inpatient Unit
16 new beds ICU/HDU /CCU facility at Calvary Hospital
Digital mammography
Neurosurgery Suite at TCH
Redevelopment of Community Health Centres
16 bed Surgical Assessment and Planning Unit (SAPU)
24 additional beds at TCH
Mental Health Assessment Unit
Skills Development Centre
Mental Health Young Persons’ Unit

So what there is “crappola”?

One of my drinking buddies was a vet, who hoped I’d get peanutted at dinner some night, as he’d never done a tracheotomy on a human before and wanted to give it a go.

On the obverse, quite a few people (often oldies) get their drs to prescribe medication that their animals are actually on (human version) so they can get it through the PBS.

I reckon they should pass a law that allows Vets to start dealing with Homo sapiens as well as all their regular clients.

Most Vets I’ve met have been a damn side more approachable than many of the GPs I’ve dealt with over the years! Plus, anyone who can diagnose a problem from a patient who can speak the same language as us humans, has got to be pretty damn good in my books! 🙂

There’s already a “bidding war” across Australia, each health service and state is in competition with each other. There’s already a lot of visa-doctors coming over, which means we’re poaching them from other countries.

Indentured doctors would be a good move, especially if extra training places for doctors were created out of it. but the gap between implementation and result would be some years.

In the short-term, in order to deliver on this promise, they’d be better off getting more cohesive in attracting overseas people here, supporting them through the process and offering support with housing, schooling etc. That would probably deliver the result they’re after.

Well if they’re just poaching them from other parts of the country, that’s just going to lead to a bidding war with the other states. And that’s leaving aside the questionable ethics of the idea.

What we need is a scheme similar to the one that landed Joel Fleischmann in Cicily, Alaska – where we assist student medics with the cost of study and they agree to work here for a period in return. Capital Exposure.

How about a doctor who speaks English? That’d be a bonus.

This is a lot better than any of the crappola the labor party has come up with! Considering they have an entire public service to come up with policy its pretty appalling the lack of quality coming out in the last term.

I’m more thinking about all the services that a government should be providing. You know, stuff like properly functioning health and education sectors that the current govt isn’t providing?

If the Libs can provide these services without the extra cash then I’d be very happy to have it back, but I think it would take slightly more than Sonic’s war-chest to provide them.

Hopefully they’ll also tell us where they are going to get these doctors FROM. It might work quite well if teh gov’t was to set up a program for the bulk importation from overseas, with accommodation and other support systems part of the whole.

mutley…again said :

After all their lip service complaining about increased taxes, I’m waiting for the Liberal tax cut policy.

I have no problems with no tax cuts as long as they provide more services with the extra cash.

Well how about you donate your money to the Government and I keep my money to pay for services then?

After all their lip service complaining about increased taxes, I’m waiting for the Liberal tax cut policy.

I have no problems with no tax cuts as long as they provide more services with the extra cash.

Great to see that they’re all fully costed… oh hang on, no they’re not. It’s pretty easy to go around promising to spend money willy nilly, what are they going to cut to pay for it?

I think its a great idea, especially for when you have a sick kid in the middle of the night that you are worried about, but nothing is open. I am definitely leaning towards voting liberal after this announcement.

The policy will probably be up on the website soonish. Judging by the completely limp-wristed attack Katy Gallagher put up, this might actually be a good idea.

The grants I’m not so sure about.

I hope this policy is affordable. If the Liberals break the bank I’m going to be so pissed off. It’s not like the Stanhope Government was a paragon of revenue reduction. After all their lip service complaining about increased taxes, I’m waiting for the Liberal tax cut policy.

I heard Zed speaking about this on 666 this morning. Just like his ’21 students’ pledge, he will ‘release costing details closer to the election’. Must be tough not having Mulcahy around anymore to provide the economic smarts….