Do you agree with the DHB mergers? What did it give us?
Anna
Candidate Answers
Candidate
Answer
On its own, Southland DHB was not going to be able to continue. The financial deficit was ballooning and it was essential reduce costs so that services could be delivered. Over a period of time we had progressed to the stage where Otago and Southland shared a number of senior positions and we were regionalising services co-operatively. It was inevitable that amalgamation had to be considered. As a southlander I did not like the idea of a Southern board. As a DHB member I saw the need for it. My fight was about representation because the original plan had been to have one set of elected representatives across Otaga and Southland. It was obvious that Southland would lose its voice under this plan. I made it plain that we would not be consenting to any amalgamation unless Southland had at least three places at the table. On population we would have been lucky to have one seat. With the Ministers appointments weighting the representation towards Otago this was an jmportant issue. It has given us a unified and much redued management structure. It has given us a greater voice in Wellington. It was save us around $3 million so that we can continue to provide high levels of service to the people of Southland and Otago. It has already made us a more attractive place for young dcotors (17 new ones this month), when we struggled to attract anyone in the past.
Awaiting response
I did not vote for the Merger as I was concerned that the savings were minimal and still to be quantified. With the merger of the PHO I also felt that we needed to ensure that this was inplace and up and running before committing to a merger of the board. I also had many other concerns around two different cultures coming together and being able to work together to ensure fair access was maintained for all the people of Southland. In saying that I have been committed now that the merger is in place to ensuring that services are not lost and access is maintained, we must deliver \"better sooner more convenient health care\"
Awaiting response
I voted against the merger because I do not agree with the unequal representation of having 3 elected members from Southland and 4 from Otago. As Southland has the greatest geographical spread that I believe is the counterbalence to the Otago having the greater population.
To date it gives us certainty of locum cover without huge costs, equal access to service provision across the region, regional planning enabling better utilisation of scarce resources.
