A number of letters in the popular press questioning the role and legitimacy of the General Practice Network have been met by a howl of protest from executive officers and chairmen of general practice divisions. Invariably these protests have concentrated on listing the benefits that divisions are said to provide for members and consumers and they suggest that the best thing for critics to do is join up and work towards the correction of any problems there may be. One writer (Australian Doctor 11 April 2008) even had the audacity to say that “we don’t speak actively of fundholding (and) we don’t leap into the politics of health care.”
The problem is that all these writers appear to have totally misunderstood why people are opposed to Divisions. Opposition is not based principally on the effectiveness or otherwise in the Divisional supply of some services – although this may form a part of subsidiary arguments. And, of course, there is no part of health care delivery that is not now politicized and Divisions do speak actively about fundholding. Indeed, the AGPN was a prominent participant in the 20202 Summit where the basis of its submission was that divisions should engage in extensive fundholding.
However, the principle objection to Divisions is that they are provided with funds forcibly extracted from taxpayers on the basis that they know better than the taxpayers themselves how to spend their money. Under these circumstances it is quite silly to suggest joining up to promote their more efficient operation.
The AMA cannot have a principled objection to divisions since the AMA is itself very much in favour of the redistribution of taxpayers’ funds to various health care projects. The AMA simply objects to the redistribution to a competing lobby group – and there is nothing principled about that. Rural Doctors are similarly placed, since they are always lobbying vigorously to ensure that taxpayers’ moneys are re-directed to rural doctors and their consumers.
Both members and non-members are invited to submit comments on articles and letters posted on this site. However, only members will be permitted to post articles or letters. All contributions will be vetted before posting.