From where we were, to where we are, to where we want to be
I am in agreement with Professor Maddocks' approach to a community hub and see the many community benefits that he sees.
Because of my studies of market failures in vulnerable, corporatised markets, I see a real risk that the hub might be embraced and taken in under the umbrella of the present system and so be neutralised as an effective generator of very badly needed change. I think it is essential that the hub be structured so that this cannot happen.
For this reason, the hub that I have proposed above goes wider than that suggested by Maddocks. I believe that to be effective it must include the community as well as the professions as central players. It is critical that the community control the information as we will not get change until this happens. It is also critical that the hub be part of the oversight process and that it provides advice to residents and their families. It must be the customer that the provider works with in providing the service.
It is essential that the hub play an integral part in the assessment of approved providers and owners. They should have the right to veto. This will ensure that the provision of good care and a good quality of life is the key determinant for growth and corporate success, and make the market work as market theory tells us it should.
The relationship should be an amicable one. I don't fight with my architect or my builder when I build a house, but I make sure that I get the sort of house I want and we all work together.
This section explains why I think the creation of a community aged care hub like this is so important.
- How we got here: traces the path from a community service to a market, but not as far back as our convict days when, as one critic has suggested, attitudes to aged care were similar to those we have today.
- Where we want to be: examines the sort of aged care system and its relationship with the community that I am trying to achieve.