Health project’s ‘independent review’ a clear conflict

+Undoctored

Health project’s ‘independent review’ a clear conflict

Media release from New Zealand National Party
1 minute to Read

National Party Associate Health spokesperson Dr Shane Reti has revealed a supposed ‘independent review’ of the failing $90 million National Oracle Solution programme is, in fact, being carried out by the owner of the company that installed it in the first place.

“Health Minister David Clark describes the programme as having ‘challenges’ and needing an independent review but has then overseen the appointment of Deloitte to carry that out,” Dr Reti says.

“However, Deloitte owns the IT company, Asparona, which helped implement the project, meaning it potentially bears some of the responsibility for the issues we are seeing today.

“I don’t think it takes a genius to see a clear conflict of interest here.

“This is at best a lack of oversight that shows that Dr Clark has no idea what is going on and at worst an attempt to avoid real scrutiny of a $90 million-plus project which has real promise but has gone off the rails.

“This project is funded by DHBs to provide a replacement for ageing finance and supply chain systems. If implemented right it would allow the sector to significantly reduce non-labour costs, and invest more in patient care.

“But it is clearly being mismanaged on the Health Minister’s watch.

“This self-titled ‘open and transparent Government’ is appearing less and less so by the day and undermining the independence of this review is just one in a long list of questionable actions.

“The Minister’s poor judgement and the clear conflict of interest here calls into question his other appointments and the public will rightly be asking what else he has got wrong?

“The Minister needs to sort this quickly by appointing an independent body to review the National Oracle Solution project. He also needs to urgently explain how this contract came to be awarded and seek an assurance from his ministry that its processes for awarding contracts are robust because this just doesn't pass the sniff test.”

PreviousNext