Critical Evaluation of a Health Care Financing Policy

Running head: CRITICAL EVALUATION OF HEALTH POLICY 1
CRITICAL EVALUATION OF A HEALTH CARE FINANCING POLICY
Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Institution of affiliation
Date

CRITICAL EVALUATION OF HEALTH POLICY 2
Introduction
Australia healthcare sector has been recognised for a very long time as being the most
outstanding and offers health care services of high quality. Its organisation, management and
leadership are of high quality which makes it possible to cater to the needs of the people there.
Nevertheless, it has faced some challenges as a result of changes occurring in the health sector
regarding requirements like the proliferation of demand and rise of healthcare expenditures.
Additionally, the pressure to advance the outcomes and inequalities are the major problem today.
This healthcare is also having difficulties in enrolling adequate workforce as well as inefficacies.
The state and territory governments have got the mandate to formulate policies for the
providence of healthcare services in hospitals and also, regulate, inspect, license as well as
monitoring of all health sectors, institution and individuals within their authorities. The main
target of Australia, health care system, is to ensure that all people get equal access to services
and allows people to access even private health services via substantial engagement of private
healthcare system in provision and financing. It is clear that the financing system of Australia is
the tax-oriented system. This means that the health care is financed by the general government
expenditure.
The government of Australia have developed so many policies concerning the health
system to ensure that they solve the problems affecting this sector. This paper will look at the
health care financing policy starting with its formulation process, stakeholders of this policy and
their interest, implementation process up to the evaluation stage(Meurk, Leung, Hall, Head, &
Whiteford, 2016). Furthermore, we shall discuss all sectors that are involved in the funding of
Australia healthcare system that includes public health insurance.
Overview of the health care system in Australia

CRITICAL EVALUATION OF HEALTH POLICY 3
Australian constitution is not so strict about the roles that are assigned to the varied
categories of government regarding health care financing(Davis, Stremikis, Squires, & Schoen,
2014). Due to this reason, the government has arranged Australian ministry of health to have
conferences where health ministers representing different levels of government come together to
discuss and come up with health policies as well as programs concerning matters of health care.
Generally, the health department together with the Commonwealth government is accountable to
all the policy made and all matters regarding health(Healy & Sharman, 2006). Specifically, it has
got the mandate to control the issues concerning financing schemes like pharmaceutical benefits
schedule and Medicare benefits schedule nationally.
Stakeholders of health care financing policy
There were many stakeholders consulted during the development of health care financing
policy such as college representatives who were about ten from the specialist sample(Nolte,
Knai, & McKee, 2008). Also, there were several jurisdictions representatives, the Australian
private hospital association, and the medical indemnity insurers association of Australia, the
Australian medical association, the Australian health insurance association, public hospital health
area administrators as well as multiple private hospitals involved in specialist coaching. In
addition, all the matters discussed was also shared with several senior doctors who were so much
involved in factors of medical training. Many of the sessions were supervised by PwC, and the
departmental representative was supposed to be present. The minimal consultation was done by
DoHA for logistical explanations(Weiner, 2005). The medical specialist training directing
committee was in charge of organising the setting where the discussions were to be held. They
also outlined the places that needed to be enlarged, and during consultations, these places were
confirmed and then categorised into four groups which include private hospitals, community

CRITICAL EVALUATION OF HEALTH POLICY 4
setting, rural and regional hospitals and private counselling practice. A common agreement from
the stakeholders was that all the trainees were to take training in the environments that they were
to practice their skills or come across as they work in medical sector(Shigayeva, Atun, McKee,
& Coker, 2010). Nevertheless, so many ideas were brought forward regarding the range of
amending of the training programs to cater for this aim. All who were included in consultations
also displayed the need for maximising financing of the specialist training, and even they were
concerned about the health professional’s supply outside the main capital cities.
Interest and views of the stakeholders
They were much concerned with the matters of the provision of specialist services to
remote and rural areas as well as the overall professional’s conditions like pathology,
rehabilitative medicine and psychiatry were the major areas of concern to them. In addition, most
of the opinions given throughout the consultation period were about the medication of the patient
by trainees and patient consent(Schoen & Doty, 2004). They raised the concerns about the
services that patients get and the insurance cover that is used by so many individuals when
seeking health care both in public and private health sector.
Health care financing policy formulation
The Commonwealth is responsible for financing the following areas like aged care,
pharmaceutical health benefits, the public hospitals, and the medical benefits(Saltman, Rico, &
Boerma, 2006). This policy touches on very broad areas since the financing of Australia
comprises of so many parts that include the tax, insurance, money from the pockets of the
patients as well as donations from the charity organisations or individuals(Mckee & Healy,
2002). In this policy, so many ways were devised on how financing will be carried out, and the