Rationalise health boards

I don’t always share the views of your regular correspondent Russell Armitage, but I heartily agree with his comments on the DHB structure in New Zealand. (Letters, Saturday 09/03/2019).

I consider myself a reasonably well informed member of the community, but when the time comes for DHB elections, I think I am among probably 95 per cent (or more) of electors who have absolutely no idea about the skill or otherwise of the candidates putting themselves up for election

And just why a country of four million people needs 21 DHBs is completely beyond me.

What an utter waste of money – 21 CEOs, 21 CFOs, 21 Chairmen, and all perhaps being paid (earning?) $300,000 per annum.

That’s about $18,000,000 not including all the other board members, and all that money could be spent much more productively than on administration, or as they pretend to believe, governance.

I fail to see why somebody requiring a hip replacement in Canterbury gets a different priority from somebody requiring a hip replacement in Waikato.

Surely in our small population, when you are affected by a serious health problem, your chances of receiving effective treatment should not depend on your domicile, and the whims of your locally and probably ignorantly elected DHB.

It is high time that there was pressure applied to the Government to abolish the DHB model and simply use the Ministry of Health to determine health priorities.

What is so different about bowel cancer screening in Auckland and Invercargill? If somebody needs an operation in Christchurch or New Plymouth, why should his or her city mean the difference between having the operation performed or delayed.

Let’s get rid of all these highly-paid and ineffective elected positions, and rationalise the way we manage health care.

P G Thompson, Hamilton