The Federal Government is using the word coordination a lot. And as part of the Queensland Government's election platform, it has announced that a new State Mental Health Commission is to have a role of coordinating services. Indeed, a major role of the new Federal Mental Health Commission will need to see coordination as one of its major preoccupations.
Beyond mental health we hear of the coordinating role of the Medicare Local system that is being developed across Australia. Additionally, in employment services, coordination of services is getting more attention.
I applaud these initiatives, but they could all come to nothing. More than that, they could precipitate further cynicism and mistrust from citizens who will see this as another good intention strangled by bureaucratic nonsense and political timidity, or merely as more hollow slogans.
The coordination of government services is important. If we are going to give the right services at the right time to people in need, governments must make sure services are integrated and targeted. If governments want to really see better health, mental health, education and employment outcomes, the integration and coordination of services is a huge issue that must be addressed.
As yet, such high-level effective coordination is not happening. So what needs to happen to bring it about?
The key is power. The giving and the use of power. The very thing that bureaucracy treasures and wants to keep to itself.
If coordinating bodies are going to be successful, governments must give them the power and authority to influence the priorities and work of various siloed departments and agencies. Coordination is more than good communication, linking agencies, or being more cooperative and sensitive. All this is good but is really a very superficial understanding of coordination.
The first sign of getting coordination right must come from our political leaders. The message must be given! We will delegate power and authority like we have never seen it in Australia. We will do it with transparency and all the appropriate safeguards and risk management procedures — but we will do it. We will take a calculated risk, because if we don't, this is going to be another failure.
Our senior bureaucrats must get this message. And part of the message must be