A reduction in the number of DHBs is a long-held policy of the Society. A recent survey of members has demonstrated that the policy has strong levels of support.
The survey of members found 92% of members favour a reduction in the number of DHBs. Less than 1% of respondents hold an opposing view, with 7% unsure.
Earlier in the year the Health Minister hinted at possible changes to the DHB system.
Moreover, the Health and Disability System Review is scheduled to report to Government next year and that would be a good time to trigger a restructure of DHBs.
The establishment of DHBs in 2001 was widely welcomed, because it marked the total repudiation of damaging health reforms of the 1990s – the worst of which were the 23 Crown Health Enterprises (CHEs), which were based on a competitive, commercial model.
When established, there were 21 DHBs. There are now 20, following one amalgamation. While many DHBs now share some back-office services and Board members, having 20 DHBs, including three for Auckland, makes little sense. The main argument for a reduction is that 20 DHBs causes unnecessary duplication of corporate structures and systems. Also issues can arise where delivery of services is shared and involve multiple DHBs.
A reduction in the number of DHBs is a long-held policy of the Society. A recent survey of members has demonstrated that the policy has strong levels of support.
The survey of members found 92% of members favour a reduction in the number of DHBs. Less than 1% of respondents hold an opposing view, with 7% unsure.
Earlier in the year the Health Minister hinted at possible changes to the DHB system.
Moreover, the Health and Disability System Review is scheduled to report to Government next year and that would be a good time to trigger a restructure of DHBs.
The establishment of DHBs in 2001 was widely welcomed, because it marked the total repudiation of damaging health reforms of the 1990s – the worst of which were the 23 Crown Health Enterprises (CHEs), which were based on a competitive, commercial model.
When established, there were 21 DHBs. There are now 20, following one amalgamation. While many DHBs now share some back-office services and Board members, having 20 DHBs, including three for Auckland, makes little sense. The main argument for a reduction is that 20 DHBs causes unnecessary duplication of corporate structures and systems. Also issues can arise where delivery of services is shared and involve multiple DHBs.