Daily review 16/04/2021

Written By: - Date published: 5:30 pm, April 16th, 2021 - 24 comments
Categories: Daily review - Tags:

Daily review is also your post.

This provides Standardistas the opportunity to review events of the day.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Don’t forget to be kind to each other …

24 comments on “Daily review 16/04/2021 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. greywarshark 1
    16 April 2021 at 6:08 pm

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/programmes/the-detail/story/2018791686/merging-media-a-commercial-and-publicly-funded-stew

    from The Detail.
    …Broadcasting minister Kris Fa’afoi has established a governance group, chaired by former NZ First MP Tracey Martin, to look into the creation of a new public media monolith.
    The proposal is for RNZ and TVNZ to be disestablished and a new public media entity created, offering radio, TV, and online content, in a similar vein to public broadcasters like Australia’s ABC, the UK’s BBC, Canada’s CBC, and Ireland’s RTÉ.

    Such an organisation would be “mixed-model” – funded through a combination of public funding – which is currently what sustains RNZ – and advertising revenue, which is TVNZ’s current model….

    On today’s episode of The Detail, Emile Donovan speaks to Better Public Media’s Myles Thomas, former TV3 political reporter and media commentator Stephen Parker, and media commentator and Newsroom co-editor-in-chief Mark Jennings about all this – and asks, given the record-breaking audiences both outlets now boast, whether such an entity is even necessary…

    But the post-Covid world has seen something of a renaissance.
    RNZ is breaking its own records in terms of listener numbers, as are TVNZ’s prime-time shows, and its OnDemand service.
    And Newsroom.co.nz co-editor-in-chief Mark Jennings says this should give the government pause for thought.

    “If a new public media entity is the answer, then what is the question we’re asking? Because at the moment, I don’t think anything is broken … it’s going superbly.”…!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    (My bold.)

  2. mac1 2
    16 April 2021 at 6:19 pm

    Tonight on TV news. Subject- vehicle on beach restrictions "I can't imagine life without being able to drive upon a beach."

    "My family have been going to the beach for three or four generations." Really? To drive four wheel drive vehicles there?"

    The quality of thought is astounding……….

    • greywarshark 4.1
      16 April 2021 at 10:05 pm

      Paralysis by analysis is the cliche' to fit this situation I think.

      • Incognito 4.1.1
        16 April 2021 at 10:13 pm

        How so?

        • greywarshark 4.1.1.1
          17 April 2021 at 2:11 pm

          Self-evident??

          A tender process was set up in November, but this was cancelled in order to get the money out faster – with the cash being sent directly to the Government’s new mega-polytech Te Pūkenga.
          But Te Pūkenga confirmed to Stuff on Tuesday that none of the money had actually been spent yet.
          Deputy chief executive Tana Winslade said the institution was still in discussions with the Minstry of Health about how to use it.

          Seeing it was to assist students with the stresses of Covid19 then it was meant to be paid out quickly and appropriately. Te Pukenga could have asked for applications from tertiary establishments for some of it stating where the greatest need was, and how the money provided could be spent to assist groups of students with the most needs effectively and fairly.

          For instance if some had to stay home and study and didn't have food supplies there for the extra meals at home instead of at the tech, they could be put on a hamburger supply route. Students not so hard up but unable to access textbooks or go on-line or use their phones because of being unable to topup or charge their phones could be helped. Student peer to peer groups studying the same topics could officially be set up. The tech student assistance officer or whoever could prioritise the help needed, and that would aid TeP in making a decsion quickly, intended to be a pilot, where most were able to get a little. They might have prioritised students from regional areas without family support in town, and international students.

          But stalling while there is need so it can be done perfectly isn't on. And when the money was allocated, that should have been made clear, that there was leeway to make pragmatic decisions without waiting for an imprimatur.

          TeP is only just starting but it will have to be quicker and fleeter of foot than this or it will slow down innovation in NZ techs. Labour might have made another grand step when all it needed was for techs to keep in touch with a department keeping overview to guard against duplication etc. and to ensure they had a case for a new spend. They might join in groups of three which keep in touch and compare notes, successes and failures, which would then be noted individually on a 'league' table in an annual report.

          • Incognito 4.1.1.1.1
            17 April 2021 at 8:45 pm

            Your examples appear to have little to do with student mental health, what the funding is/was for!?

            • greywarshark 4.1.1.1.1.1
              18 April 2021 at 8:51 pm

              Actually I thought it was about spending nmoney on students mental health needs, not just looking at them, talking about them etc. Starting on providing what those on the ground say is required to assist. There must be a number of pressure points that the student services would know about. The integration of the funding getting to the need in the best way is what I was discussing. What is wrong with that?

              • Incognito …
                18 April 2021 at 9:07 pm

                Mental health services for students is not general student services such as having adequate internet connection and/or electronic device, for example. They are completely different things; apples and oranges.

                • McFlock …
                  18 April 2021 at 10:18 pm

                  Well, at Otago Uni, Student Health in my day (and apparently still today) was part of the student services division and paid for out of the services fee (with also a payment per visit that was significantly cheaper than a gp if you could get one).

                  And Otago screwed the pooch with the first lockdown and didn't leave enough students time to get home.

                  So there is a uni service provider, [thousands of?] students disrupted but still on campus, but nobody qualified for or claimed for the funding. To me, that smells funny.

                  • Incognito …
                    18 April 2021 at 10:41 pm

                    Some unis have handed out laptops, for example. I’d argue that such a student service is not and should not qualify as and for mental health funding. Grey seemed to unnecessarily complicate things and blurr boundaries, IMO. Perhaps this relates to why not a cent has been paid out and spent yet.

                    • McFlock …
                      18 April 2021 at 11:23 pm

                      So a university should expect students to travel to a new region, often living away from home for the first time, usually right at the age range for the onset of a variety of mental disorders and risky behaviours, and not bother to ensure they have access to primary healthcare?

                      Nope, that's one of the things quite a few tertiary education institutions do right. It's part of pastoral care.

                      But the main point to mentioning UO student health is that there's a catchment of people who would qualify for assistance (even at a <1% rate of need, that would be dozens of claims) there is a specific provider specialising in their healthcare needs, and yet nobody in the entire country has made a claim.

                      Which makes me suspect that nobody is actually telling the students how to get help to get help, or telling PHOs how to help their patients get assistance.

                      And yeah, all primary healthcare organisations should be government funded. But I’ll settle for “qualify for government funding to treat the patients the funding is aimed at helping”.

                    • greywarshark …
                      19 April 2021 at 12:39 pm

                      It seems to me your boundaries Incognito are so defined that you can't see my point as to how help could be provided as a first measure, by going to whoever handles students mental health. There should be health services provided, for simple physical complaints, and if there is no mental health component, the medical service personnel would be a starting point to what needs there are. And they may not be anything to do with laptops or devices assisting.

                      Finding out at grassroots level, rather than top-down from the policy-parameters-first level would have started the ball rolling; which didn't happen.

                    • Incognito []
                      19 April 2021 at 10:23 pm

                      This is an example of what I’m talking about: https://www.otago.ac.nz/studenthealth/services/otago020535.html

                      I don’t set the boundaries; they are not my boundaries. I think it is imperative to clearly articulate what we talk about and what we mean. Blurring boundaries and twisting meanings is not helpful at all; be clear, be concise, be specific. Too often we talk past each other.

                      Students do receive mental health care even though not a cent has been spent of that additional funding. Mental health care for student has been provided for years. The issue is that it is not nearly enough, especially during the Covid-9 pandemic.

                      HTH

                    • McFlock …
                      19 April 2021 at 11:12 pm

                      Mental health care for student has been provided for years. The issue is that it is not nearly enough, especially during the Covid-9 pandemic.

                      By many tertiary education providers, not all.

                      And I thought the issue was the government had apparently freed up additional funding during the pandemic, but hadn't actually spent a cent of that funding. So much for "not nearly enough".

                      This we passage in the original commenter's link seems enlightening as to why (my added italics at the end):

                      A tender process was set up in November, but this was cancelled in order to get the money out faster – with the cash being sent directly to the Government’s new mega-polytech Te Pūkenga.

                      But Te Pūkenga confirmed to Stuff on Tuesday that none of the money had actually been spent yet.

                      Deputy chief executive Tana Winslade said the institution was still in discussions with the Minstry of Health about how to use it.

                      “Te Pūkenga is in discussions with the Ministry of Health about an allocation of $1.62 million per year for primary mental health and addiction services for tertiary students across our network of 16 subsidiaries,” she said.

                      It’s understood there has been some disagreement between the Ministries of Health and Education over who was responsible for administering the money.

                      Hmmm.

                    • Incognito []
                      19 April 2021 at 11:33 pm

                      There are over 400 tertiary education providers in NZ currently. What basic level of mental health care should all these provide for their students? Indeed, where does this care fit: MoH or MoEd? That’s why I suggested that Chris and Andrew bang their heads together. The extra money was allocated, FFS!

                    • McFlock …
                      20 April 2021 at 1:49 am

                      To roughly quote Sir Humphrey, is the matter a matter of administration of policy (in which case it's an operational issue), or is it a matter of the policy of the administration of policy (in which case I must refer you to the ministers 👿 ).

                      To further complicate matters, while the educational institutions provide health centres for the welfare of their students, you'll probably find that the student health centres are entities registered as Primary Healthcare Organisations, so maybe the funds should come via a DHB contract with the healthcare provider rather than directly to the institution via either of the ministries.

                      Well, as long as a DHB is a thing, of course. Could possibly have to check the weekly planner on that one.

                    • Incognito []
                      20 April 2021 at 8:49 am

                      I doubt that the DHBs will be culled altogether and we may find out tomorrow, but more collaboration and central oversight would be welcome, and leadership from good leaders instead of these elected fiefdoms of amateurs and egomaniacs. Some are chomping at the bit and looking forward at having a field day tomorrow.

                    • Incognito []
                      20 April 2021 at 9:04 pm

                      Gauld said he believed DHBs should have been abolished a long time ago.

                      “Many people are very good, some are very competent, very knowledgeable but it’s a model that doesn’t work, so let’s see what happens on Wednesday.

                      “They may serve notice they are going to disestablish the current board arrangements.”

                      https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/124882577/ban-on-dhb-members-making-political-comment-may-prevent-criticism-of-health-reforms

                    • McFlock …
                      20 April 2021 at 9:56 pm

                      In some ways elected board members are set up to fail – the funding is inadequate, so they end up hiring managers who are adept at penny-pinching inexpensive inventory lines and gaming targets rather than doing what the targets are supposed to represent, simply to look at least partially competent while their DHB slowly sinks under mounting debt.

                      Regional administration results in local service inadequacies, while more localised administration ends up trying to mash largely standardised funding into areas with incredibly diverse needs.

                      One DHB has long patient distances, another has low vax (but high breastfeeding) rates because of one community withing its boundaries, another has massive poverty, and another has significant costs engaging with its largely ESL community. But they all have roughly the same funding formula calculated by Wellington out of the total health budget, and get fines for low scores in the dhb target league tables for things that are essentially demographic problems that need money they don't have.

                      But then regionalised control has a tendency to ignore local problems – it's regrettable if a couple of Invercargillites die in transit to see the specialist in ChCh, overall it's more efficient and the regional states are good. Sucks to live in Invercargill, though.

                      Damned if I know the fix, either way the system is buggered without a real (not management-level) funding increase.

    • Sabine 4.2
      17 April 2021 at 9:55 am

      A $25 million fund for student mental health announced in July 2020 is yet to spend a cent.

      The zero-spend came after the Government cancelled a tender process and amid news it is set to spend tens of millions less than planned on its new frontline mental health service.

      The Ministry of Health has blamed the wider under-spend on Covid-19, but the $25m was allocated in the midst of Covid-19 and explicitly sold as helping students through the pandemic.

      lol……..they had since last year to sort that shit out, chances are they won't do much now. These are the articles that i expect from a National government – i.e. see we are doing something….blablabla – not from a labour one.

      But then when the idea of good government is a surplus – or an 'underspend' or rather a 'not spend a dime' of allocated budget then this is what is to be expected. An announcement of something that leads to nothing. But one is shown to be doing something…..

  5. Pat 5
    16 April 2021 at 11:13 pm

    "The district inspector's findings revealed Christopher raised serious concerns about taking medication and sometimes actively opposed taking it."

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/checkpoint/audio/2018791894/grieving-father-sues-health-authorities-over-mental-health-rights

    I have great sympathy for his family…my experience of mental health treatment is akin…my father was treated against his and his wifes wishes (who held a medical power of attorney)…my mother was bullied and threatened by the head psychiatrist at the DHB department… not only against their wishes but against best practice, indeed against medsafe guidelines.

    And weve given them the power to decide on life…FFS