On 03/18/98 09:22:39, "Ruth Livingstone" <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>I know your present policy is to fight against the whole concept of PCGs, and
>I wish you luck in your endeavours (although I do not agree with you).
No, I am fighting for my intellectual and clinical independence.
If people want to form into PCGs, good luck to them, but leave *me*
alone.
>However, I would strongly advise you to develop a contingency plan, if , as
>seems likely you are forced into bed with these neighboring big spenders.
>Remember, PCGs are not supposed to be made up of just GPs. You can dilute the
>influence of your fellow GPs by ensuring that the community trusts, CHC, PPGs,
>HA and any other interested party you can think of, is allowed a voice.
Immoral travesty of democracy:
Votes per Practice are allocated on capitation basis. That is to say,
one vote for every 500 patients on your list.
This gives me 5 votes. Gives *every other* Practice a much higher
number of votes. One of them has 30!
That means that it only takes *one* Practice, any one Practice, to
vote me down; whereas I'll need an awful lot more on my side to win
anything. Everytime!
Now, what do you all think of this kind of democracy? I am particularly
interested to hear from the 'thumping majority, do what you like' bunch
;-)
>I am really concerned that if you sit back and let others run the PCG on your
>behalf - you will end up in deep and smelly cow dung.
Ruth, Ruth! Do you not know me by now?? :-) ;-)
Ahmad
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Ahmad Risk
http://www.cybermedic.org
Chairman British Healthcare Internet Association <http://www.bhia.org>
Director Internet Healthcare Coalition - USA <http://www.ihc.net>
Home: +44 1273 724866/748198
Work: +44(1737)240022 Fax: +44 1737 244660
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|