The appointment of a consultant to help the Act Government meet its election commitment of shedding $32 million from the health budget and at the same time reduce waiting lists has met with a hostile reception from unions and the Opposition. The unions assert they were not consulted and question what an American company knows about Australian health care. The Opposition asserts the consultantcy is a waste and that the Government should get on with implementing the results of earlier inquiries. The Government says that the consultant, Booz-Allen and Hamilton, has been engaged by 16 major hospitals in Australia and New Zealand and has a record of reducing costs and improving care. Of course, it does not matter if the consultants are American; though in fact they are an Australian subsidiary. It is a non-issue. The important point is that the ACT gets the most for its health dollar. The public has every right to be sceptical of a new inquiry.
The history of health administration in the ACT has been one of constant cost overruns; higher costs than the Australian average; longer waiting lists and poorer service that most other states; endless promises of reform and inquiries with no result; and despite this, constant reminders of tireless, caring working by nurses and doctors as individuals who are treated express their grateful praise when they finally get through the waiting lists and in to hospital. At first blush, it would seem pointless to add yet another inquiry to the others before it. However, the Government says this consultantcy is not to identify areas of cost overruns and inefficiency because these have already been identified. The new nine-week consultantcy is to find ways of changing things so those overruns and inefficiencies can be eliminated _ across the whole system, not just administration.
The essential difficulty in ACT health has been that inquiries have frequently shown the path, but politicians have refused to walk down it. This Government has a clear mandate to do something because the Liberals made health a key election issue. At the same time the Government must reduce waiting lists. These are tasks it set itself and will ultimately be judged on them. It is entitled _ indeed should be expected _ to get in early with some action. It is a pity that the unions have refused to co-operate, but they cannot expect public sympathy unless they give the new Government a chance.