The budget included a real per person CUT in health spending of some 3%, compared to the previous financial year. And this follows decades of underfunding. Lester Levy is either deluded or gas-lighting when he denies the REAL health issue of austerity by this government.
A message to our currency-issuing government - just fund health properly.
Like every other section of the public service where cuts have focused on the so-called "back office", how can anyone in their right mind not see that making cuts to "support" roles will affect the "front line"? If there's no one there to undertake administrative tasks, for example, who do you think is going to have to do them? The commissioner? Shane Reti? To use the coalition's (and, unfortunately, the media's) denigrating and reductionist parlance, the "front line" (of any public service) cannot function without a "back office".
As a former "back office" worker in various organisations, I recommend that the Parliamentary "back office" workers and workers in electorate offices suddenly get sick for a few days 😜- THEN these ignorant cockwombles will get a feel (without risking innocent lives) for how essential they are to keep ANY organisation running. e.g. You could say that Distribution workers are "back office" as we only see supermarket shelves full & checkout operators & shelf fillers on the "front" when we go shopping, but in 2006 in Aotearoa supermarket distribution workers went on strike and supermarket shelves emptied during the 4-week strike. Whatever anyone thinks about their cause (they had huge support to keep their families fed, so...?) it is clear that EVERYONE in an organisation has a part to play whether you can see them or not, although 🤔 increasingly I'm wondering if we should do away with some of the Cabinet Ministers & just go straight to the lobbyists?🤷 (who are working in the "back office" so to speak 🤬)
An issue that is rarely discussed in relation to End of Life Choice is that the government of the day made End of Life Choice legal...and funded it. End of Life Choice is predominantly exercised by educated white people, who by definition have good access to health care; they have access to doctors to make diagnosis for example. Funding End of Life Choice (rather than for example GP's in Northland) provides more services for people who are already accessing services, rather than funding services for people with limited or no access. This inevitably makes equity of access to health care worse. It is bizarre that the only time a GP is funded to employ an interpreter is if the patient is exercising an End of Life Choice (because it is in the legislation) but not funded explicitly for any other consultation.
The budget included a real per person CUT in health spending of some 3%, compared to the previous financial year. And this follows decades of underfunding. Lester Levy is either deluded or gas-lighting when he denies the REAL health issue of austerity by this government.
A message to our currency-issuing government - just fund health properly.
Like every other section of the public service where cuts have focused on the so-called "back office", how can anyone in their right mind not see that making cuts to "support" roles will affect the "front line"? If there's no one there to undertake administrative tasks, for example, who do you think is going to have to do them? The commissioner? Shane Reti? To use the coalition's (and, unfortunately, the media's) denigrating and reductionist parlance, the "front line" (of any public service) cannot function without a "back office".
As a former "back office" worker in various organisations, I recommend that the Parliamentary "back office" workers and workers in electorate offices suddenly get sick for a few days 😜- THEN these ignorant cockwombles will get a feel (without risking innocent lives) for how essential they are to keep ANY organisation running. e.g. You could say that Distribution workers are "back office" as we only see supermarket shelves full & checkout operators & shelf fillers on the "front" when we go shopping, but in 2006 in Aotearoa supermarket distribution workers went on strike and supermarket shelves emptied during the 4-week strike. Whatever anyone thinks about their cause (they had huge support to keep their families fed, so...?) it is clear that EVERYONE in an organisation has a part to play whether you can see them or not, although 🤔 increasingly I'm wondering if we should do away with some of the Cabinet Ministers & just go straight to the lobbyists?🤷 (who are working in the "back office" so to speak 🤬)
An issue that is rarely discussed in relation to End of Life Choice is that the government of the day made End of Life Choice legal...and funded it. End of Life Choice is predominantly exercised by educated white people, who by definition have good access to health care; they have access to doctors to make diagnosis for example. Funding End of Life Choice (rather than for example GP's in Northland) provides more services for people who are already accessing services, rather than funding services for people with limited or no access. This inevitably makes equity of access to health care worse. It is bizarre that the only time a GP is funded to employ an interpreter is if the patient is exercising an End of Life Choice (because it is in the legislation) but not funded explicitly for any other consultation.
All staff have been offered voluntary redundancy, from admin to surgeons. The coalition of destruction wants to screw us all!