Political commentators, are allowed their opinion, unfortunately, it opens the door to speculation wether it be right or wrong. Then again you get the ones that are politically biased, which should not have air-ways to peddle their bias.
The coalition have a hit list, public servants, education, health. All the big ticket items that somehow can do more with less. As they say.
Do the coalition have any other members other than Mr Abbott, or is that it.

I would have thought it obvious, Shadow Minister.

>>Pericles, I see you just focus on the one issue and forget the other inconvenient ones. Firstly, why cancel the CDDS when while it may have flaws, it clearly benefits many needy families<<

A programme that was costed to provide $7.5m per month in benefits, but is instead rorted to the tune of ten times that amount is clearly a case of government waste, and should be terminated at the very first opportunity, would you not agree?

But simply cancelling it would be poor politics, so it needed to be replaced by a more useful and better targetted programme.

>>Secondly, considering your comparison of Jetstar's new routes and gov health which are so different, I have no reason to believe you have any proj management capabilities.<<

Ahem. I would deduce from this that your own projects (which you carefully decline to use as illustration) are similar in scale and scope to that which you are criticising? Otherwise, my point - that projects differ in scale and complexity, and that you were casually lumping them all together as "projects" - still stands.

>>For example Jetstar's rollout is defined by regulation<<

Exactly. Every project has different hurdles to overcome. Simply dumping a new programme on the nine thousand or so dentists in private practice is a significantly different proposition to simply ordering a bunch minions to do your bidding - which, I suspect, would be far closer to your idea of project management. Each of those dentists is a small business, which has its own fiscal priorities which are separate from those of the government.

Think of it as trying to run one of your projects with nine thousand independent contractors, and then tell me with a straight face that you could complete it in six months.

Pericles,

Your comment "A programme that was costed to provide $7.5m per month in benefits, but is instead rorted to the tune of ten times that amount"

Is blatantly false (or a lie). A medical program designed in 1996 costs more in 2012 with a larger population, medical costs rising far above inflation, and increased scope does not add up to rorting.

Professor Zoellner Of Sydney University Dentistry who has been involved stated categorically: "Government statements that the Medicare Chronic Disease Dental Scheme was widely rorted are not supportable on the available data." Perhaps you could provide proof of the scale or the rorting other than parroting Labor's lines. That the CDDS was a failure is bollocks. Its purpose might differ from what Labor wants to do, but it did what it was supposed to.

What Labor has done is cancel this aid policy and offered sweet bugger all for 19 months.

As for the types of projects I have done, they include design and building of factory and power generation plant. I am painfully aware of getting regulatory approval, and the road blocks to starting a project. However, for this "project" the road blocks are few and far between, and with you have not yet shown any.

The 9000 odd dentists do not need to be organised. They all have existing business and billing systems. All they need is information as to who is eligible for this dental care, and how much and who they bill. The government bodies that determine eligibility already exist, and need to know the rule changes. The body (medicare) that pays the bills also exists, and simply needs guidelines to operate under the new parameters.

The only obstacle to starting this implementation by mid 2013 is will power from Labor, until then the CDDS provides some cover.

I am aware of Professor Zoellner's opinion.

"Ms Plibersek on Wednesday reiterated the scheme was poorly designed and open to rorting. But Sydney University's head of oral medicine Hans Zoellner insisted the CDDS was "fantastically successful", with 1.5 million people treated since late 2007 at a total cost of $2.7 billion."

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/govt-adds-4bil-to-dental-scheme/story-e6frf7kf-1226460586896

It's a matter of take your pick, isn't it. And as I hinted earlier, you have once again chosen the opinion that most closely supports your knee-jerk position, which is, predictably and inevitably, that this government can do nothing right. You appear to have no interest in anything that might broaden your view, or cause you pause for even one moment.

And I'll see your Professor Zoellner, and raise you Mike Morgan, Dep. Head Melbourne Dental School at University of Melbourne, Stephen Leeder, director of the Menzies Centre for Health Policy at University of Sydney and Ian McAuley, lecturer in public sector finance at University of Canberra.

Who think it is rather a good plan.

>>As for the types of projects I have done, they include design and building of factory and power generation plant... However, for this "project" the road blocks are few and far between, and with you have not yet shown any.<<

Only because you are not listening, or even pausing to think outside the blinkers of your conservative prejudices.

>>The 9000 odd dentists do not need to be organised.<<

That's exactly what I mean. You view the roll-out of this policy as some kind of command-and-control exercise - a bit like project-managing the design and build of a factory, or a power generation plant.

>>All they need is information as to who is eligible for this dental care, and how much and who they bill.<<

Not really. Imagine for a moment that you are one of Australia's nine thousand dentists in private practice. Will this programme increase or decrease your workload, and increase or decrease your revenue? And what will you do about that?

I'm sure that somewhere, deep down, you care for the livelihood and aspirations of Australia's small businesses, dont you?

This scheme was specially designed for people with chronic diseases. What the Federal Government have done is show a lack of compassion and understanding with extra needs. People with cancer, HIV, HCV and so on often have chronic gum problems and lose their teeth unless they see their dentist at least once in 4 months. Having no teeth, or having to wait for false teeth, could be detrimental to their health. This is why the Dental Assassination is really worried about this mistake of abolishing such a good scheme.
The new dental scheme is already covered by the dental schemes in most states like NSW, which offer financial subsidies in the country or the Sydney Dental Hospital, which is free for those on the Health Care Card. It doesn't change anything much in NSW. But the Dental Hospital is under funded and has a horrendous waiting list, as you can imagine. The States know their systems better than the Federal Government. Those who need subsidised dental treatment, especially via the Hospital system should not have to wait in long lines. Medicare can't afford this, it will snap, especially with the failed amalgamation with Centrelink. The Medicare system for those with Chronic illnesses should be left alone as Medicare can only just cope with it after new pressures have all but grounded it to a snail's pace.

Pericles,

You have yet to show me anything that indicates wide spread rorting of the CDDS. While TP claims that millionaires can claim against this scheme, I have yet to see any proof that any millionaires have done so.

"You view the roll-out of this policy as some kind of command-and-control exercise" - Actually quite the contrary, as with existing GPs the dentists compete for the work, and get paid once the work is complete and billed out. Based on what you perceive of dentists' capabilities, you must be a public servant. Small businesses tend to be very flexible, and I have yet to meet small businesses or practices that are likely to turn their noses up at extra work. Unlike the government, I cannot see a small business taking more than a month or two to get ready once they have access to the required information.

I do care about small businesses, you obviously have no clue about what they can and cannot do.