Law and Regulation

What is happening in this category

>

Bill Wyatte is now contributing to a Challenge Dispersed Expertise

>

Bill Wyatte commented on the Challenge Dispersed Expertise

Perhaps more exploration of the problem may confirm that there are many pathways towards solutions.

Bureaucracies are advantaged by power funnelled to them via delegation.  People in advantaged groups tend to defend and bolster the status quo and discourage alternatives.  This can create boundaries to inputs, thinking and behaviours.  In Government, this is the disconnect from the diversity of knowledge and awareness of the people it serves.

I believe permeability and diversity are antidotes, but require conscious choices that have not yet been made. 

>

James Dowsett is now contributing to a Challenge Dispersed Expertise

>

Peter Grimbeek commented on the Challenge Dispersed Expertise

I immediately envision an on-line democracy not only with instant crowd-sourced votes but also with in-depth crowd-sourced discussion of policy options.

Some would say that this envisioned world might move a bit too quickly. Perhaps we need non-online deliberations at a slower pace.

In some ways, this is an Obama vs. Trump kind of moment. Obama deliberated slowly and possibly painfully about how to proceed but his actions were fruitful. Trump on the other hand favours instant responses that might or might not be fruitful (except in a bitter way). 

>

Peter Grimbeek is now contributing to a Challenge Dispersed Expertise

>

Richard Ferrers is now contributing to a Challenge Dispersed Expertise

>

Richard Ferrers commented on the Challenge Dispersed Expertise

As a value researcher, I am interested in what people value, and how it changes over time. 

The digital revolutions have empowered and connected adults this century, in the way widespread education did in the 20th Century. Yet government in Australia has barely if at all changed since Europeans came to Australia.

I think there is a lot to learn from the Swiss who are experimenting with several attempts at more direct democracy. Government moves far too slow for a always connected, wikipedia and google at our fingertips, open data type world.

If government was to ask what do people need, it is an ongoing consultation with their representatives, rather than every three years. Government should tap the crowd for ideas, priorities, and time to reduce services we don't need, and prioritise those we do.

We need an ongoing community discussion about reinventing government for a new century, for a always connected, data deluge world.

>

Ed Bernacki is now contributing to a Challenge Dispersed Expertise

>

Gail Fairlamb is now contributing to a Challenge Dispersed Expertise

>

Sharon Zivkovic is now contributing to a Challenge Dispersed Expertise

>

A new Solution was published Dispersed Expertise

>

Bruce Muirhead is now contributing to a Challenge Out of Pocket Medical Expenses

>

Bob Dick commented on the Solution Regulating Banks

It might not even be essential that cooperatives could compete with the big banks on price.  With sufficient publicity, competing on service and on reputation might be enough to make a difference.

I wonder if GetUp would be interested in a campaign to support banking cooperatives.

>

Vern Hughes is now contributing to a Challenge I am that girl

>

A new Solution was published Out of pocket medical expenses

>

A new Solution was published Regulating Banks

>

Dina GREY is now contributing to a Challenge The MindHive Book

>

Bill Wyatte is now contributing to a Challenge Following the money - Does Trump/Russia = Australia/China?

>

Bill Wyatte commented on the Challenge Following the money - Does Trump/Russia = Australia/China?

My personal thoughts on this include that regulation may be the response - or it may not. 

Before jumping to solutions, we need the discussion about what our society is and consensus about what we expect of it and its institutions.

Few Australians comprehend what we have and how it is intended to work and even fewer of us appraise the gaps between the intended and the actual.  The things that will bite us are likely to inhabit those gaps, as recent reportage about the behaviours of our captains of commerce illustrates. 

 Transparency is one key factor - Transparency International didn't take its name through happenstance. 

Finally, regulation doesn't set or repair culture.

>

Peter Grimbeek is now contributing to a Challenge Following the money - Does Trump/Russia = Australia/China?

>

Peter Grimbeek commented on the Challenge Following the money - Does Trump/Russia = Australia/China?

I wonder sometimes if the fear of Chinese investment and Chinese influence in Australia is overblown. While the totalitarian nature of the Chinese State and its influence on Chinese business via organs of the state such as the People's Liberation Army is somewhat sinister, perhaps its investment in Australia is just part of doing business, and the use of Chinese money to influence politicians is no more scary than the use of American money to do the same thing.

If that is the case, then do we need to tighten up regulations as per the proposed Foreign Interference Law or should we continue with business as usual?

>

Rosie Odsey is now contributing to a Challenge I am that girl

>

Peter Grimbeek commented on the Challenge Out of Pocket Medical Expenses

Relevant extracts from the ABC article identified by William Bell, include the following: 

Because most clinical services outside of public hospitals operate as private markets, specialists are free to charge what they like — and they do. This means the gap payment (between what the specialist charges and what Medicare covers) can be significant — hundreds or sometimes thousands of dollars.

In addition to doctors' fees, some specialists also charge what's variously known as a "booking" or "administration fee". This fee is on top of the payment they receive from you or your health fund to cover the gap costs, and is not covered by insurance.

Another reason for high fees may be that some specialists benefit from established referral patterns from local GPs or hospitals, so they have little incentive to keep their prices competitive.

Then there are specialists who charge a supposed skill-based premium. Some doctors say the reason they charge a lot of money is because they're better than all the other doctors, but, of course, there's no published information which allows us to verify that claim.

>

William Bell is now contributing to a Challenge Out of Pocket Medical Expenses

>

William Bell commented on the Challenge Out of Pocket Medical Expenses

The following ABC article is relevant.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2018-05-28/how-out-of-pocket-medical-costs-can-get-out-of-control/9592792

 

>

David Thomas is now contributing to a Challenge Out of Pocket Medical Expenses

>

David Thomas commented on the Challenge Out of Pocket Medical Expenses

The link between tax and private health insurance is a rort - I am forced into paying for private health insurance that I hardly use because I'd pay more tax if I didn't (with no guarantee that the extra tax I pay goes into the public health system). This just fuels the private health insurance industry.

The lack of transparency and consistency over bulk billing is also bizarre - some GPs do, some don't; some GPs do sometimes... all for the same service (presumably).

>

Peter Grimbeek commented on the Challenge Out of Pocket Medical Expenses

Lloyd Taylor, when you talk about the AMA as Australia's most successful trade union, I'm reminded of the pilot's strike by the Australian Federation of Air Pilots (AFAP) in 1989. That union was beaten down by the Government but up to that point might also have been described as a very successful trade union. So, things can change.

>

Peter Grimbeek commented on the Challenge Out of Pocket Medical Expenses

Jayd Moore, I assume that when you say: "that specialists can only charge a capped out of pocket expense. Patients should be informed of their out of pocket expense immediately and options if they cannot afford this," that this is in fact the regulatory change that you have in mind?

Is there more?

>

Peter Grimbeek commented on the Challenge Out of Pocket Medical Expenses

With reference to Chris Oldham Dept of Transport & Main Roads's comment about how difficult it is to compare health funds, I've had a similar experience. It looks as if the kinds of sales people that stock supermarkets, telephone & Internet connections, electronic goods, etc, are now shaping up the presentation of health care products.

In other words, the opacity that Lloyd Taylor also focuses on is a deliberate ploy and unlikely to go away unless regulated in some way. I realise that in Australia we deride and at the same time expect Governments to fix things (by regulation) but self-regulation of industries does not work.

 
Show More Category Activity ▼

Law and regulations are the building blocks of a coherent society. These frameworks influence each one of us without exception. With tremendous potential to create a fair society, legal and regualatory policies require an element of substantial public endorsement. MindHive, as a crowdsourcing platform, is a public vehicle that brings Government, Universities, Business and the broader community into one digital room. Through the MindHive platform effective policymaking, is empowered by the depth of the discussion, encompassing the views of each diverse and individual contributor.

How should Australia’s law and regulatory policies and strategy be defined? How to ensure the effectiveness of our nation’s law and regulatory environment? What are the solutions to current and recurring shortcomings?

Discuss. Analyse. Exchange. Learn. Inform

Join MindHive discussions and be an active contributor to Australia’s policymaking initiatives; help optimum resources channeled towards law and regulatory initiatives.

The major challenges

Are you sure you want to do this?