Yes we could buy a much better printer and eventually be re-imbursed
through indirect expenses BUT we have made a reasonable assessment of
our needs and can manage with a much more economic machine. My point is
that we as GPs are make good and economic assessment of our needs and
'others' within the NHS seem to find it impossible not to make more
economic judgements.
Roger Leary. GP,  Esher, Surrey.
[log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: Adrian Midgley <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: 10 October 1998 10:51
Subject: Re: Community care costs


>[log in to unmask],Net wrote at 17:49 on 08/10/98
>about "Community care costs":
>-----------------------------
>>I find our district nurses have just been supplied with a 1100ukp
>laser,
>>15 sheet per minute, printer in their office plus new Pentium PC all
>>linked by ISDN to enable them to be kept in touch with their base and
>>provide improved data.
>
>Lucky them.  But why did the site survey not identify the solution
>of linking to your network, so as to give you access to whatever the
>community Trust has that is useful and they agree you cold use, and
>to let them print to your networked printer?
>
>> Why are we so different!
>
>Well why are we?
>Because we are somewhat underfunded and overworked.
>
>Because we are unwilling to buy ourselves equipment we feel a need
>for, in case our colleagues then get it free or subsidised.   But
>classically if we all buy a Rolls Royce then three years later we
>can all afford to buy another one...
>
>Because the (this may be a problem local to N&E Devon) HA IM&T
>support is poor in quality and quantity and GPs hitherto have not
>had the opportunity to employ competent IT people (I mean ones with
>a screwdriver and who have read the manual, not
><spit>"strategists".  But now do if we run PCGs sensibly...
>
>The business of spending money on things we want, and awaiting
>reimbursement via indirect expenses could be made easier by
>aggregation in the PCGs.  This reduces the risk of a small (and
>likely cashstrapped) practice declining to spend money on something,
>in the expectation that they will be dragged in later having
>received first the reimbursement via the pooled expenses and second
>the incetives to follow the leaders.
>IE if the 400 PCGs agree to buy particular levels of kit, on a
>particular schedule, then the initial investment will pick up
>repayments as time goes on.  Now that might be a bearable use of
>PFI,
>--- OffRoad 1.9r registered to Adrian Midgley



%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%