Find out why 120,000 Aucklanders want the community lab contract reviewed!
Blog Archive
17 / 10 / 06 - The New Zealand
Association of Pathology Practices have
joined the call for a moratorium on changes to community
laboratory services. How many more groups need to put forward
their case before the government will take some action? It is
surely clear now that they cannot remain disinterested and at arms
length from this issue.
A little birdie pointed
out these
meeting minutes from the CMDHB meeting on 9th September 2006.
Interesting section on the lab conract:
"Labs Project
· The project is now in the implementation phase
with key individuals from Labtests Auckland leading each of the
project areas.
· The judicial conference has not slowed down
proceedings from Labtests perspective and Mr
Mules noted that the hearing is focused only on the
tender process.
· Board members expressed anxiety around monitoring
and requested detailed reports on key milestones in the implementation
plan.
This was deferred to the Confidential section of
the meeting."
A couple of questions
I'd like answered:
Which board members
are expressing anxiety?
What detailed reports
have they requested?
Why was it deferred
to the confidential part of the meeting?
Well spotted little
birdie!
------------
16 / 10 / 06 - A great
news report about the laboratory situation was on Radio NZ last
Friday. A quotable quote from Dr Bierre about "rhetoric" from
pathologists:
"I think that they
should actually front up and provide some hard information about what
they are talking about. They obviously haven't convinced the
minister and they certainly haven't convinced me."
The Medical
Association, several GPs, specialists and primary health organisations
are trying to front up at the judicial review, but Labtest and
the DHBs
opposed their application to intervene.
I wish Dr Bierre and
the DHBs would front up and answer our questions.
------------
15 / 10 / 06 - I spoke today with an
experienced nurse who said she had received a visit from Dr Bierre and
Lee Mathias in her place of work (a DML collection centre) to solicit
her for potential employment. If this is their recruitment
strategy I think it is deplorable.
Placing advertisements
in the paper and writing to them is one thing, ringing them is cheeky
but acceptable, however turning up in someone's place of employment to
solicit their CV is, she felt, intimidating. I would agree.
Her reaction was
praiseworthy. A polite "thanks, but no thanks". She is one
of the many whom I have spoken to eyeing future employment either out
of Auckland, or out of New Zealand.
An experienced nurse
with 10+ years experience who would rather leave town than work for
the new provider. You go girl!
What a tragic loss
of skills and experience for Auckland.
Another interesting
thing which she discussed with me was the relationship which is formed
between patient and nurse if regular testing is required. Taking
blood from someone is a very personal thing and for someone who
requires regular testing, developing trust is crucial. She
recalled many patients or hers or her colleagues who would insist on
having their blood taken by one person they knew well and trusted.
Along with the doctor
and patient, community pathology completes the primary health
triangle. Where is the impact assessment and evidence of
consultation with patients about this change? If it exists I'd
like it tabled so we can all read it.
------------
13 / 10 / 06 - The New Zealand Medical Journal has an
excellent article about the
laboratory issue released today. A couple of quotes from the
article:
"Legalistic process and devices such as
probity reports have been used as a shield from criticism by DHB
planners focused on reduction of cost and business risk.
Clinical service consequences and clinical risk seem to have little
influence in the final selection of providers."
"When service reporting workloads reach
the point where there is insufficient time or enthusiasm for optional
tasks, pathologists will withdraw and retrench out of necessity.
This can only become apparent after time, and reengaging the
disenfranchised will be difficult."
"The changes will inevitably result in
disruption of established clinical relationships....The changes result
in clinical risk."
"The changes open new
possibilities for cost-shifting and service reduction, and may work
against innovation."
"When service reporting
workloads reach the point where there is insufficient time or
enthusiasm for optional tasks, pathologists will withdraw and retrench
out of necessity."
"It is hard to escape a conclusion that in
pursuing this disruptive and risky course the DHBs may be penny wise
but pound foolish...When the chickens come home to roost, many of the
managers responsible for these changes will have moved on, leaving the
profession to contend with what may be a far less attractive future
for those who remain."
------------
11 / 10 / 06 -
Aucklanders react strongly to Health Minister's reassurances is
the latest media release from Dontriskourhealth.com, echoing your
comments on the forum, and challenging the Health Minister to wake up
and get involved in this issue. As the NZMA, ASMS and College of
Pathologists have said: the crisis is here now.
The Government needs to
step in and act.
Key points to ponder:
Pathologists and
staff of DML have said they do not want to work for the new
provider.
The pathologists and
laboratory staff are highly trained knowledge workers who are in
strong demand worldwide.
Why would they stay
here out of sense of duty, when the
Auckland DHB
chair suggested they could work for the new provider or drive a
taxi?
Once these
professionals leave there is little chance they will come back.
------------
10 / 10 / 06 - It is astonishing that
with so many national and international expert groups, such as the
WHO,
NZMA,
Royal College of Pathologists, PHOs, and the
College of
GPs all warning about a pending disaster in community pathology,
that the Government's reaction is, from Health Minister Pete Hodgson:
"[We] are confident that the fair
and open tendering of lab contracts should not negatively impact on
the number of pathologists working in New Zealand". (full article
click here)
In my lifetime I have
never seen so many groups be so outspoken and united with concern
about a health issue. 100,000 Aucklander's have also signed a
petition calling for a review of Auckland's lab contract decision.
How can any responsible
government dismiss such a vocal outcry?
Points of interest
from the Auckland meeting are items 1,2 and 4. In the Waitemata
minutes item 3.1. Some thoughts after reading the minutes:
Far from welcoming
the delegation, Wayne refused to meet the delegation but changed his
mind when the media arrived.
If during the RFP
process a decision had been made not to use the hospital
laboratories why, shortly after being awarded the contract, was Dr Bierre looking for spare capacity within the hospital system?
Click here for that news article.
The irony of
juxtaposing a decision not to release the roadmap with a notation
that misinformation is being spread.
If they would answer
the questions of GPs and the public instead of making endless
reassurances and use the word "robust" all the time there might be
less speculation about what is happening.
Pretty basic really.
------------
05 / 10 / 06 - Dr Ross Boswell of the
NZMA today released a statement entitled:
Risks to
laboratory services increasing. He is calling for a
moratorium on any further changes to laboratory services until a
national policy can be created.
We support that call
and encourage you to read the release. The key points made are:
"a. There is a complete absence of a
comprehensive national policy
framework for the provision of laboratory services. As a result, DHBs
are making critical strategic decisions about services in a policy
vacuum, based entirely on local or regional factors and perspectives.
b. There is an over-riding context
of trying to find cheaper ways of purchasing laboratory services in
order to meet budgetary targets, to the potential detriment of
sustainability, quality and safety. There is considerable risk that
this drive to cheapness may lead to the penalising of associated
clinical services by cost-shifting.
c. National implications for
workforce and the long-term sustainability of laboratory services are
not being attended to, and there is consequent risk that services may
collapse locally or nationally. "
New Zealand's DHBs are
overhauling this industry region by region, and opting for the
cheapest provider, ignoring all the expert advice and refusing to
listen to stakeholder views. This is reckless, dangerous, and
poses a serious risk to health in New Zealand.
Community pathology
underpins diagnostic medicine. Decimating the morale and
destabilising the employment continuity of professionals in this
industry will result in early retirements and relocations
overseas.
Once they're gone,
they're gone. We will be the losers.
There is no one to
replace them.
Are you comfortable
with that....I'm not.
------------
04 / 10 / 06 -There was
a comment on the forum today which requested more information about
who is behind the site, and what the motivation was for setting it up.
Who I am
and why I'm involved has
been well reported in the media. I haven't made a big deal of it on
this site because I didn't want it to detract from the issue.
However, the questions raised are reasonable, so for those of you who
haven't read the media reports, here's the background:
My wife
works (update: worked) for Sonic Healthcare in a junior admin role. I got
involved in this issue when she brought home the petition.
The site
was setup of my own volition. After researching the issue, and
canvassing views from all the medical professionals I knew, I was so
concerned that I decided to collect petition signatures myself online,
and create a public forum and news hub. Aucklanders need a voice
in this debate.
I speak
for myself, and on behalf of all the people who have, since seeing the
site, joined the campaign with me.
I am
concerned that Auckland's community pathology service is at serious
risk and this poses a threat to public health. My motivation is
to see the best decision made after proper consultation with
stakeholders.
Self
evident by the reaction of industry and the public, the community
consultation before this decision was made was totally inadequate.
If the right decision has been made then after consultation it should
stand, but this decision has not been made the right way, and so it
needs to be reviewed.
To quote
from my first blog posting:
"This is a campaign I
have launched of my own accord and volition because I'm fed up with
elected and appointed public servant bureaucrats making decisions, on
behalf of their constituency, without genuine
consultation. This time it has really hit home: they don't
care what we think. Their primary concern
was cost, not my welfare.
That is very very scary. "
------------
02 / 10 / 06 -Less than
48 hours after you heard it first on the forum, Labtest have
announced their new lab at 37-41 Carbine Road, Mt Wellington.
It makes interesting reading.
------------
01 / 10 / 06
-
Click here for a report about the rally last week. On the
forum there has been some talk about location of Labtests Auckland lab, and
suggestion that it will be a dual purpose facility.
This is
an unconfirmed rumour and I will make enquiries to confirm it's
authenticity. If you can corroborate this speculation -
let me know.
------------
26 / 09 / 06 -
Congratulations to the Counties-Manukau DHB for
receiving the petition and protest today. They, like the
Waitemata board, have set an example to the Auckland DHB. We
await their formal response. It's never too late to review a bad
decision.
After
speaking to several of the pathologists today, I have serious doubts
that Labtest will be able to retain the expertise needed to run the
new lab. While they were committed to Auckland and Diagnostic
Medlab, all of them had been offered jobs in Australia, and all of
them said they refused to work for Labtest.
The
pathologists I spoke to objected to working in a cut-price
environment. They were proud of the high quality of service they
offered Auckland now, and said they would not compromise their
professional integrity by working for a provider who may be under
staffed or under resourced.
Australia
has a shortage of more than 150 pathologists right now.
Australian labs could employ the entire pathology staff of DML and
still not solve their shortage crisis.
With
better pay and working conditions beckoning overseas, why would they
stay here and work for a new provider offering a Toyota style lean
thinking environment? They work with people, not cars.
------------
25 / 09 / 06 - Rally tomorrow at 19 Lambie Drive outside
the Counties-Manukau DHB meeting, 12:30pm. See you there!
WHO warns
that rising workforce exodus threatens health systems
In an
aptly timed announcement (click
here), the World Health Organisation
said today, from a committee meeting being held in Auckland, that the
rising workforce exodus to wealthier nations presented a serious
threat to health systems.
The
situation facing Auckland’s community pathology service is a prime
example of exactly what the WHO is referring to. To quote from the
release “If present trends
continue, this worsening shortage will push health systems to the
brink of collapse…”.
With the rhetoric
coming from
Dr
Bierre like “They’ve got no where to go” (click
here) and Wayne Brown: “They can work for the new provider… or
drive a taxi” (click
here), a shortage is
looking increasingly likely. DML staff have strongly protested this
decision, and said they would rather leave Auckland or retire than
work for the new provider. Why would they choose a cut price provider
offering a lab in ‘…any
suitable factory building’, as Lee Mathias
put it, over a foreign job with better wages and working
conditions.
Pathology
Collectors Course
Since the last
newsletter a training company offering a “Pathology Collectors Course”
has appeared from Australia and started advertising for students.
They didn’t have a website for New Zealand, but you can read the
advertisement:
click here.
I have
requested an information pack, but while I wait, I wonder how they
will train a pathology collector in 2 days, while every other course I
have seen takes from 6 weeks to 2 years. Amazing!
Auckland has
plenty of trained phlebotomists, and the new provider has already
announced the majority of cut backs will be in this area. Is the new
provider going to replace them with people who only have two days
training?
I sure wouldn’t want these trainees taking my bloods!
------------
21 / 09 / 06 -According to Dr Bierre,
Auckland only needs 40 collection centres. Should we be grateful he is
supplying 43?
Here is a "per head of
population" comparison showing how many collection centres other
cities have (highest to lowest):
City
Population
Rooms
Equivalent to Auckland
Melbourne
3.6m
398
176
Brisbane
1.8m
188
167
Sydney
4.3m
414
154
Vancouver
1.1m
67
97
Hobart
250,000
14
89
Auckland (before)
1.6m
84
84
Auckland (after)
1.6m
43
43
Auckland already has
the lowest number of collection centres per head of population and now
that is going to be halved.
I'm all for efficiency plans, and if point
of care collection can be done that's great. However, the new
provider has signed a contract, promised Auckland better access
to collection facilities, without prior agreement from the PHOs
that will be relied upon to provide this service. They have
already indicated they are unwilling, so what is Labtest Auckland Ltd
going to do?
Is
this visionary or very scary?
19 / 09 / 06 - The Nelson-Marlborough
DHB have
announced their decision to award the community lab contract to
Medlab South in yet another DHB decision which has been met with
fierce local opposition.
Not surprisingly, the
dumped provider is considering legal action.
It is time for the
government to urgently review the national community pathology
strategy. These changes are seriously undermining the industry
and creating a long-term risk to New Zealand's health.
We are already short of
pathologists. The short duration and unpredictability of the
DHBs when awarding these contracts, largely on the basis of price,
will encourage underinvestment in people and facilities, and
ultimately lead to a decline in service levels. It will
inevitably create an environment where providers take risks to cut
costs, and the consequences could be fatal.
The short sighted, save
at all costs, mentality of the DHBs is ruining the health system.
Junior Doctors, Radiographers, Pathology...a pattern is emerging.
While they save money in the short term, we will all pay big time in
the long run.
Remove the
paper-shuffling, form writing bureaucrats from the system now.
This will provide ample money to contract sustainable service
providers who will invest in, and foster, the professional community
and standards required to provide a world-class health system we
expect.
------------
14 / 09 / 06 - What other changes are
in store with the new provider? Well if
this letter
by Heather Roy is anything to go by then all of you who pay for
healthcare twice by taking up private health insurance may be about to
pay for your testing twice too.
Is this part of the
"innovative" approach to laboratory testing that we have been promised
from the new provider, yet to be announced? Is making private
specialist patients pay for their own tests just one of the ways the
new provider expects to save money for the DHBs?
I am starting to get
very uneasy about the fuzziness and total lack of detail from the DHB
and new provider about the new system. It is making me anxious
that they won't tell us where the new collection centres will be,
where their lab is, who their staff are and which GPs have agreed to
do point of collection testing. The longer they delay the
details the more I suspect that Aucklanders are not going to like the
results.
------------
13 /09 /06 - Another great rally,
this time outside the Waitemata DHB meeting today (click
here for RadioNZ report).
Congratulations to the
Waitemata board for their decision to accept the petition and front,
with chairman Dr Dwayne Crombie mingling in the crowd before the rally
began in earnest. Reports suggest that during the presentation
the board took an interest and engaged the pathologists who presented
the petition.
They are to be
applauded for their open mind. Their real challenge now is to
admit that this contract was awarded without adequate stakeholder
consultation, and review the decision. Be brave Waitemata DHB,
do the right thing by your constituents!
------------
12 / 09 / 06 -Quote of the day from
Chris Gallagher of the Nurses Union -
"Auckland
community is already under-resourced in comparison with worldwide big
city centres and this decision to use a new unknown company whose
current expertise is in animal testing is not be supported by our
Auckland community."
LOL. I wonder if
they'll get vets to do the testing, because it doesn't look like we'll
have any pathologists.
Here's some interesting figures for you.
This from
Healthscope's news site announcing the contract:
Margins:
• EBITDA margin expected to be in the range of 15 to 20%
over the contract term. Investment: • Initial development costs and capital
assume requirement to establish service from ground zero. • Have been estimated to be at approximately $NZ18.0
million
How does this sit alongside this statement
from
Dr Bierre: "We are not a cut price
operation at all, we will be taking less profit..."
How much of the $15m savings are less
profit, and how much are cutbacks, cost shifting, and wage cuts?
You really have to wonder.
I can't explain an $18m investment to win
a $560m contract. I understand just DML's lab alone cost over
$50m. What sort of lab and collection network are they going to
setup with $18m?
------------
11 / 09 / 06 - Busy last couple of
days. I have now overhauled the front page to make it more
interactive. I hope you have voted in the online poll!
Yesterday I sent out
the newsletter and a press release about the rally this Wednesday 1pm
at Lincoln Green on Lincoln Road, outside the Waitemata DHB meeting.
Great response and feedback from you all about it I look forward to
seeing you there.
------------
07 / 09 / 06 - Great protest,
brilliant coverage. Despite initially refusing to accept the
petition, the ADHB reconsidered. In the face of overwhelming pressure
they did accept it in the end.
Click here to
see One News coverage of the picket.
What does this show? Bad
decisions can be reconsidered!
The challenge for the
DHBs now is to read the petition and public submissions, take stock,
and review the lab contract decision.
Wayne Brown's comments
I can only describe as sad:
"But DHB chairman
Wayne Brown is unmoved and says critics need to get over it. "They can
either work for the new company or...drive a taxi," says Brown."
Article
How can someone with
that lack of respect and empathy for health professionals possibly make good
decisions on behalf of the Auckland public? I wonder if that
sentiment is shared by his elected colleagues on the board, who will
be seeking re-election shortly.
If they value their
positions, they would be well advised to listen to the public who
elected them into office. We will not accept our world class
pathology service being put at risk.
------------
06 / 09 / 06 - TV3 and Radio New
Zealand have both aired excellent articles about the lab contract
and picket tomorrow. I thank them for their quality reporting
about this issue.
Well it has been
another flurry of activity in the last 24 hours. TV, radio and
lots of discussion on the forum. Your petition submissions and
all the comments posted on the forum have been printed out and will be
included at the picket tomorrow. Thank you to all those who have
commented or signed the petition.
A few quotes from
Dr Bierre from this mornings radio interview :
(any errors or misquotes please bring to my attention and I will correct immediately)
"Recruitment is already
underway, well underway....We have not contracted any pathologists as
of yet, but we have had expressions of interest..."
"We haven't got to the
stage of contracting with anybody yet. We're still developing
our HR systems. We have employed an HR consultant as of Monday,
so that process is well underway."
"...by the first of May
we will be opening a full service laboratory so that we will have
collection facilities in place..."
"We have an
implementation committee that consists of 9 people. 6 of those
have started laboratories of this size before in the past (Kathryn
Ryan: from scratch?)...from scratch...(Kathryn Ryan: "In a new
city in a new country")...yes."
"We are not a cut price
operation at all, we will be taking less profit..."
"This is a significant
contract for the people of Auckland it means they will get a better
service than they have had in the past"
Questions which I think
need answering after hearing that interview are:
How realistic is it
to say that the recruitment process is "well underway" when you only
employed an HR consultant on Monday and have no contracted
pathologists with 8 months till 1 May when your full service lab
is going to open?
If Labtest are going
to have a full service laboratory up and running by the first of
May, who is going to be working at DML laboratory for two months
till 1 July processing 30,000 tests a day?
Who are the 6 people
working for Healthscope who have started a laboratory of this size
before, from scratch, in a new city in a new country, and in what
timeframe did they do this?
If Labtests Auckland is not a
cut price operation, how much are they going to pay the staff?
Posts from people on the forum have suggested the rate of pay for
lab workers and phlebotomists is lower than DML.
In what ways will
Labtests Auckland's service be better? Two months later and we have yet
to get the details outlining how they are going to trump the service
offered by DML. Stump up with the details Dr Bierre. I'm
getting tired of rhetoric, particularly the word "robust".
Here is a link to a
very interesting set of meeting minutes from Northern Regional DHB
Coordination Meeting 9 June, 2005 at 3pm
click here. I quote from these minutes:
9 - Laboratory
Project Tony Bierre (Board member ADHB) and Bruce Gallop were introduced to
the meeting at this point.
A considerable discussion evolved with two different scenarios
involving the way forward with the goal of
Contracting
private labs on a credible cost effective basis.
Improving the
capability and capacity of hospital based labs.
CEs to provide
update in July
What part, if any, did Dr Bierre
play in shaping the Northern Health Boards views about the future of
pathology in the region before he became inactive? Has the
Auditor General done a report on this matter? If so could this
please be released.
------------
05 / 09 / 06 - You can read our media
release for the rally by
clicking here. To collect 100,000 signatures is a remarkable
achievement and shows just how strongly the public feels about this
issue. This is a historic moment in Auckland health. We
have never seen a public reaction on this scale about a regional
health issue.
I look forward to
seeing you all at the rally this Thursday to present the petition.
------------
02 / 09 / 06 - Latest news! Another
rally this Thursday 7th September 8:30am outside Auckland Hospital.
The petition, which
last I checked was signed by over 90,000 people, (including those
who've signed online), will be presented to the district health
boards. See you there.
I have organized a
meeting for Monday with a North Shore MP to raise our concerns, stay
tuned for how that goes.
Updates to the website
include the introduction of a hit counter. I have started it off
using last months figures. Now you can all see at a glance how
many eyeballs we're clocking.
------------
28 / 08 / 06 - I am still astonished
after reading this article (click
here) by Nick Smith in the Listener entitled "Testing Times".
The comments coming from Dr Bierre and Gary Smith I find scary:
"“I know the
GPs are saying we won’t do it,” says Smith, “but I would be keen for
you to remind us all that we are actually here for the patients.”
Has Garry Smith taken
the
Hippocratic oath like the doctors have? I would suggest
given the current environment no GP would be here but for the
patients. What, one wonders, is Gary Smith here for?
Both he and Bierre
are scornful of any risk posed by the flight of pathologists overseas.
“They’ve nowhere to go,” says Bierre. “They try to manipulate the
whole process to their ends, they threaten to resign and they go home
and the wife says, ‘I’m not going, I’m not leaving.’"
Is the health of
Auckland dependant on the goodwill of GPs and pathologists' wives?
(Isn't that a bit sexist? Husbands too!)
If this is indicative
of the esteem Dr Bierre has for Pathologists then I fear he will have
great difficulty recruiting anyone but the most desperate. I
would find it difficult to accept working for someone who thought of
me or my professional colleagues that way.
------------
25 / 08 / 06 - Hurrah! This is more
like the reporting of the rally that it deserved. Check this
out: "Thousands
march for Medlab". I have no real idea how many people were
there but it was sure more than 500 that some media reported.
One posting on the forum claiming to have talked to the police said it
was a few thousand. I rang the Auckland Police to check this
fact but could not get an answer.
I made some enquries
and managed to find a transcript of the questions posed in Parliament
about the contract. Click here
to read the full transcript.
------------
23 / 08 / 06 - The releases from
Labtest suggest they have had a great response to their advertisements
and people are positively falling over themselves to be working with
them. The word from industry is totally different. Someone
is telling porkies. I don't know who to believe.
------------
19 / 08 / 06 - Awesome march. It
made a powerful statement. Most important was the diversity of
people there: Jo Public, GPs, Pathologists, Greens, Union members and
officials, of course Diagnostic Medlab Staff. I believe there
was at least 500 people there, if not a thousand. The
Auckland community will not let it's world class pathology be ruined
by a DHB determined to take crazy risks to cut costs.
To paraphrase Keith
Locke - they must not choose dollars over sense.
Great media turnout, I
spotted a couple of big cameras and spoke to several reporters from
major news agencies. NewsTalk ZB's article can be found online
already
click here. Audio reports
click here.
------------
17 / 08 / 06 - Another day with
some significant developments
Development one Green
MPs for Auckland, Sue Bradford and Keith Locke have joined the calls
for an urgent review. A brief quote from the release you must
read:
“We also
have reservations about the fact that Labtests is partly owned by Dr
Tony Bierre, who was a member of the Auckland DHB and played a key
role during early discussions about the restructuring of lab services,
actually making a presentation on the issue to the Northern DHBs
Coordinating Committee,” Ms Bradford says.
“The three Auckland DHBs are taking a huge risk by opting for dollars
over sense,” Mr Locke says.
“Medical professionals and the people of Auckland should not be used
as guinea pigs in a cost-cutting exercise which risks enormous
systemic failure by mid next year.
“We call on the three Auckland DHBs to reconsider their decision, and
on the Minister of Health to take a close look at what is really going
on here before it is too late,” Mr Locke says.
I support their calls
for the Minister of Health to examine what is going on here. See
you on Saturday Green Party!
Development two I have
received a communication claiming that the Auckland region Pathologists met last night and have signed a
letter, sent to the Government, stating they are
unwilling and have no intention to work with the new provider. This is serious.
Australasia is already short of pathologists,
this
article published by Royal College of Pathologists Australasia has
a compelling discussion about the serious shortage of pathologists
and lack of trainees coming through the system.
This decision may
result in an exodus of younger pathologists from Auckland and the
retirement of those advanced in their career. There is a real
possibility that there will not be a pathology workforce this time
next year large enough to cope with the workload.
Pathologists are the
single most crucial element of this whole debate. Without their
expert eyes examining our samples we are at serious risk. Does
anyone remember what happened in Gisborne?
If the Auckland
District Health Boards and Labtests Auckland cannot reach an agreement
with the pathologists in the region to support the new provider they
risk a real disaster. If they were responsible they would
have consulted with, and got the support of, the pathologists before
awarding the contract to a new provider.
Development three
Greypower have joined the protest and
challenge the
lab change too. This, like the Greens announcement, is
important news. It is an issue which the members of Greypower
have a significant stake in and it is wonderful to see they have
examined the situation and declared heir position. See you
on Saturday Grey Power!
------------
16 / 08 / 06 - Well a week has passed
and there have been some fantastic developments. The rally is
going ahead, and there has been some serious action in the papers,
with a letter to the editor from the CEOs of the DHBs and several
releases telling us all to move on.
The DHBs will not shut
this issue down by going deaf and telling us to move on. Our
health is at stake here and there is widespread concern about this
issue.
We're moving on
alright, moving en masse. This Saturday is an opportunity for
the Auckland Public and medical industry to get out and stretch their
legs marching up Queen St, while telling the DHBs in no uncertain
terms what we think of this decision.
Be there at QE2 Square
- 1:45pm!
------------
09 / 08 / 06 - Great news today, Diagnostic Medlab has
taken legal action in the high court over the awarding of the
laboratory services contract. Finally they are taking some
serious action. We shall see what comes of this action over the
next few weeks. This decision deserves at least a judicial
review.
The latest whispers are
that the march will be Saturday 19th of August. I hope to see
you all there. Firm details will be announced once released.
------------
08 / 08 / 06 - I have just googled and found the ADHB
release sent out through
Scoop
on the 4th of August.
Here is
classic spin: "ADHB Board chair Wayne Brown says Dr Bierre
went beyond the statutory requirements in standing down from all board
business six months prior to the community laboratory RFP and was not
privy to any information or participated in any discussion or
decisions regarding the tender."
They protest their
innocence too much. Dr Bierre might not have been privy
to information once the RFP was released and contract put out to tender,
but he was on the board while the RFP was being created!
Questions need to be asked about this.
Should an elected
member of a public board, representing us, be allowed to tender for a
contract awarded by the board? Isn't it an amazing coincidence.
Ps. Did you notice the
word "robust" in this release too? I did!
------------
06 / 08 / 06 -Labtests Auckland have released a
progress update. No details, more reassurances. I
challenge Labtests Auckland to be more forthcoming with the details.
Anyone can give reassurances. Where are the details?
"It is
still early days but Labtests is moving quickly to put into action its
advance planning so that people can start to see for themselves how we
will operate and the high standards we intend to impose." -
Progress Update
It is still early days? They have
less than 11 months now to setup an extensive testing network and
laboratory.
Advance planning? How advance was their
planning? I wonder if it was advanced before Dr Bierre stood
down from an active position on the DHB?
"High standards we intend to impose."
I ask exactly what standards they intend to impose on the Auckland
public. Are they the same standards of service we have come to
expect? Where is the detail?
------------
04 / 08 / 06 - I have heard rumors that there will be a
rally soon. Stay tuned for details. Get all your
friends ready for a rally Saturday 19th in Central Auckland.
Dr Bierre has
resigned from the Auckland District Health Board. How
convenient. According to the Herald article he was elected in
2004. Now that Labtests Auckland has the contract for community laboratory testing he must be too busy to hold this public office position.
Is this the only reason
why he was a member of the Auckland DHB?
There needs to be serious inquiry into
what role he played in the formation of the RFP for this contract, and
what knowledge he might have had when pitching his tender.
Something smells very funny here.
------------
01 / 08 / 06 - News of the day is a rumour posted on the
forum:
"Sherralynne:
I've heard a rumour that Labtest are offering a
very low pay rate to phlebotomists, around the level of our brand new,
in-training, pay rate."
We are seeking verification of this
rumour. If you can substantiate Sherralynne's post please
contact us here.
------------
27 / 7 / 06 - Three developments
today, the report on
Close
Up TV1 at 7pm (click
here to watch), which asked some difficult questions that I felt
were poorly answered. The word "robust" was used three times, is
it starting to sound like a broken record to you too?
If the plan is so
"robust" why not confidently reveal it to us all? Little detail
is being drip fed and at times it has been contrary (see below entry
25/07/06 10pm).
The most relevant point
made in this interview was that right now they don't have any
people. If the Diagnostic Medlab staff stick with the
company and back their team, Labtest will have real difficulty in
delivering on their milestone obligations, one of which surely would
be recruitment. Stay strong and hang in there - the
public is supporting you.
Second development -
the pathologists letter read out at the end of the
Close
Up report. I wish I had taped it to listen to it again but
the gist of what heard appeared to suggest they were quite happy where
they were and would not be seeking employment elsewhere. No
pathologists = no laboratory. Simple as that. If
anyone can quote exactly what was in that letter please email me and
I'll publish it because it could prove crucial.
If Labtest are going to
have to import an entire staff of pathologists they have a monumental
task on their hands. Good luck Labtest!
Third development - the
strong words coming out of DML. This I missed yesterday but it
has answered some questions (at least someone has!) - they are not
going to roll over and play dead. Two points of interest:
DML is one of the
most efficient of all Sonic’s laboratories
Sonic’s Ellerslie
laboratory is not available to Labtests
Looking at the release
appears DML bid approximately $5m below their current contract.
The DHB are saying it is a $15m pa saving, therefore Labtest must have
bid approximately $10m below this, based on the rough figures made
public to date.
If DML is one of the
most efficient labs in the Sonic Group, how exactly are Labtest going
to top that by $10m a year? I really want to know how. So
far we've had reduced collection centres, longer turn-around times
(depending on which release you read) and on-site testing. Is
this all? I wonder. What other "savings" have they got in
store?
By making their Lab
unavailable to Labtest, Sonic are really laying down the challenge.
On the news tonight the figures were a bit confused between $80m and
$18m that Labtest had set aside for setup costs, but needless to say,
if they do have to find a lab and set it up. This will be a
tremendous undertaking in 12 months, especially if they are also
having to setup collection centres and hire 300 staff.
Having just won the
contract, and with this great task ahead of them, you really have to
wonder about their ability to deliver when the CEO is on holiday in
Fiji.
------------
25 / 7 / 06 -10pm- Thanks to Dee for posting
a link to a Labtest's
Notice to Patients
In this
letter, I quote that Labtest Auckland says:
In the NZ Herald's article
$560m laboratory contract will halve number of blood-test clinics, Dr Bierre is reported : "He said one
area in which Labtests Auckland could make savings was in lengthening
the turn-around times of non-urgent tests, which were sometimes done
more quickly than necessary."
"We are writing to reassure you about
the improved laboratory services we will be providing to the
communities covered by the three District Health Boards in the
Auckland region, from July 2007."
I don't see anywhere in this letter where
they quantify this statement. I challenge Labtest to publish
their plans for improving the laboratory services currently
offered in Auckland. So far as I'm concerned, Diagnostic Medlab
have been providing a superb service, and if Labtest think they are
going to improve on it I am really keen to know how.
Show us your plans Labtest!
They have also said in this letter:
"The contract
Labtests Auckland has signed with the DHBs is detailed and
prescriptive."
"Under
the confidential contract, Labtests Auckland has signalled its
willingness to institute a more open and transparent cost structure
with the ARDHBs to help them make their health budgets go further in
addressing community needs."
I challenge Labtest to institute a more
open and transparent cost structure with the public and publish the
contract. What other changes are in store? Lets all
see the detailed and prescriptive arrangement and judge for ourselves
whether we believe they are up to the challenge.
------------
25 / 7 / 06 -6pm- Introducing the Campaigner of the Week
- Bruce
You can get your "I trust
Diagnostic Medlab!" t-shirt at Logoland in St Lukes Mall near
Whitcoulls. Contact me if you are
interested to purchase one. I would suggest we add
dontriskourhealth.com
underneath.
------------
24 / 7 / 06 - Well I got a nice surprise
this morning to open the NZ Herald and find that Mr Rudman appears to
have really taken a liking to me.
Click here to read his article. He is truly skilled in the
art of flaming.
I have sent a letter to the Editor of
the NZ Herald (click here) replying to Mr Rudman. He has now
taken two swipes at me, I think it's only reasonable the Herald afford
me the
opportunity to state my case and defend this website.
------------
22 / 7 / 06 - *Newsflash*
- get
your "I trust Diagnostic Medlab!" T-shirt from Logoland in St Lukes
Mall next to Whitcoulls. What a great idea. Big ups to
whoever got that t-shirt patter made up and printed!
------------
22 / 7 / 06 - Thank you everyone, the
response has been totally overwhelming. I felt passionately
about this issue, but it has really blown me away to see how many of
you care deeply about this too.
In the last 24 hours I've spoken to one
reporter, been
bagged by Rudman, and received a flood of messages
supporting the petition. All in all this is an encouraging
start!
To all the supporters of this petition:
We have to get the word out there and raise awareness.
This petition is about urging the DHB to
consult with the public, and reconsider their decision. We are
encouraging them to make a decision in line with public values, and
not take unnecessary risks with our health.
Cheaper is not always better and anyone
can put costings on paper. DML knows from experience what it costs to
run community laboratory services in this area. Surely if DML
are saying it's not feasible to run it that cheaply we should take
notice. They are the experts with the experience.
------------
21 / 7 / 06 - Well its launched!
Finally at 3 o'clock yesterday morning I managed to get the basic
website finished and integrate the tag board. I've never
undertaken a website like this but it's amazing the energy you find to
put into something when you're really passionate about it.
This is a campaign I
have launched of my own accord and volition because I'm fed up with
elected and appointed public servant bureaucrats making decisions, on
behalf of their constituency, without genuine
consultation. This time it has really hit home: they don't
care what we think. Their primary concern
was cost, not my welfare.
That is very very scary.
During my lifetime,
when required, Diagnostic and Medlab, and then DML, have provided an
outstanding service of the highest calibre. The DHBs have made a truly awesome decision on our behalf without even
asking us what we think.
Ballsy and brave or
arrogant and short sighted? You decide.
