The withdrawal of the Australian Medical Association from the NT intervention may have taken the relationship between the Government and the premier doctors’ union to “a new low” but the AMA has systematically botched its relationship with Labor since Rosanna Capolingua became president and is now paying the price.
The AMA was a persistent critic of Labor in the run-up to the election, criticising Labor for failing to consult with the AMA in developing its health policy, praising the then-Government and, on 22 November, issuing a “report card” backing the Coalition over Labor, declaring some of Labor’s policies “disappointing” and the Coalition’s “much stronger than Labor’s.”
This need not have damaged the relationship with the new Government, given its professed willingness to start with a clean slate with all but a few select individuals, like Peter Hendy in his previous role at ACCI. But Dr Capolingua has a particular problem with the Government’s GP Superclinics proposal, and has repeatedly attacked it, claiming it would damage patient care. The AMA’s real concern, however, is similar to that of the Pharmacy Guild: competition for existing providers.
In fact the AMA’s focus on protecting its members at all costs has led it into repeated run-ins with the new Government. The AMA opposed a COAG proposal to establish a national register of doctors — shortly after the “Butcher of Bega” revelations about Graeme Reeves – claiming it would threaten patient care (in fact “patient care” is the AMA’s default justification for everything it opposes). Capolingua also accused the Government of having an ideological motive for raising the Medicare surcharge threshold.
The latest stoush is over the Government’s efforts to expand the role of nurses and other allied health professionals in the provision of primary health care. The AMA rejects anything that fails to maintain the primacy of doctors. Capolingua inevitably reckons it will damage patient care. The AMA and the Australian Nurses Federation are meeting today in Canberra to discuss the issue.
Capolingua also appears to have paid a direct price for so consistently opposing the Government. She missed out on an invitation to the 2020 Summit, while her predecessor Mukesh Haikerwal went along. Ditto the National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission. Dr Rod Pearce, the chairman of the AMA’s general practice committee was appointed to the Government’s primary health care advisory panel over Capolingua.
Capolingua’s claim that the Government is conducting a smear campaign against the AMA over its role in the NT intervention is unlikely to change this.
When first elected last year, Capolingua declared that she got along with most people and that she thinks a good working relationship is important. Rudd’s response on the weekend about the AMA and the intervention, that he was “sick and tired of the politics of this stuff”, suggests she has clearly failed miserably with the Government.
Neither the AMA nor the Health Minister wanted to comment to Crikey on their relationship.
The Government owes the AMA nothing. They are a right wing group whose loyalties lie with the Liberal Party and always have. Their actions and utterances leading up to the November election indicated whose bed they are sleeping in, nothing has changed. If they want dialogue with the Health Minister and The Government, best they get off their high horse and act like doctors, not a bunch of bullies barricking openly for the discredited opposition. Perhaps the AMA executive should ask their members in the regions, their thoughts about the Government. I have and there is a vast difference of opinion between many of them and Rosanna Capolingua. Her position is shaky at best and terminal come the worst scenario, like get lost. Tact and common sense are not her greatest strengths.
The motto of the AMA should be “plus ca change, mais c’est la meme chose”. In 1976–77 the AMA conducted a pitched battle in Melbourne against doctors in Community Health Centres, to the extent of hauling a Professor of Medicine up before them to explain himself. Their attitude to midwifes and homebirthing has been disgraceful over the years; any experienced public health person knows that what rural Australia urgently needs are nurse–practitioners, and possibly “barefoot doctors” (as in China in the old days) rather than technologically dependent city doctors. The AMA are largely to blame for Medicare’s bias towards payments for procedures, rather than psychiatric, geriatric, or even old–fashioned family doctoring.
As to Davids letter. The AMA would have to the most militant union in Australia. Didn’t Bob Hawke threaten them When Bruce Shepard was the union boss there in the 80’s due to their opposition to Medicare and their threats of industrial action, that the Government would do similar things to the AMA than what was done with BLF and the Painters and Dockers federation. Namely de-registration. Could some one correct me on this?
Wrt Greg Rudd(? relation to our kev?) question. I will not answer specifics except that to suggest that the AMA “would have to the most militant union in Australia” is just plain silly. After such an intro anything else said would have to be taken with a grain of salt
David: It is interesting that you note that the AMA are Right wing. There are quite a few unions that are Left wing, too, and give the Labor Party millions in donations every year.