In response to Dr Gregory's letter (On target, August 6). I wish to tautoko him and acknowledge the many achievements of the organisation that he chairs, Te Hauora o Te Hiku o Te Ika.
I cannot concur, however, with Dr Gregory's comments about the organisation that I workfor, Hauora Hokianga. He asserts that Hauora Hokianga (Hokianga Health) is a mainstream organisation serving a mixed community and that our trustees are retired professionals with a mix of Maori.
Hauora Hokianga provides an integrated range of health services, including hospital, community nursing and general practice, all at no cost at the point of need. The community that we provide services for and with is largely Maori. The trust board reflects the ethnicity of the population: it is also Maori with a small minority of non-Maori members. Only one or two of the trustees could be described as 'retired professionals', but they are just as importantly Hokianga residents, elected by their community.
These features make Hauora Hokianga pretty unique, and about as far from 'mainstream' health services as can be found in Aotearoa.
The Hokianga community has been extraordinarily successful for nearly 20 years now in keeping their health services running to a high quality and very professional standard. This is a particularly noteworthy achievement given that the service, as Dr Gregory alluded to, has not been allowed access to specifically targeted Maori health funding, despite serving one of the highest needs and most rurally isolated Maori populations.
Dr Gregory does say that Te Hauora o Te Hiku o Te Ika had looked at the 'Hokianga model' but considered that it has 'significant drawbacks'. It is hard to imagine from a Hokianga perspective, at least, what the drawbacks of our service model might be. Community ownership, quality, integrated care, whanau ora, outreach clinics and free primary health care - why would any community in Northland not consider these features desirable?
