Undoubtedly we’ve all taken interest in the Trump administration’s announcement of a $500 billion investment into securing America’s dominance in artificial intelligence (AI).  Flanked by the who’s who of big tech, the announcement came a day after President Trump repealed Joe Biden’s orders to address and safeguard against risks in AI.

It signalled many things, among them the clear focus of the new administration on securing America’s position in AI development and deployment, the central role of big tech in policy decisions, and that the general intent to minimise government interference also applies to technology.

Whether that results in more rapid innovation delivering quality outcomes that benefit us all, or the opening of a Pandora’s box of risk, only time will tell.  AIDH remains supportive of robust safeguards for AI in healthcare, recognising that healthcare is a high risk setting where if things go wrong, they can result in catastrophic and irreversible outcomes.  That said, guardrails must not unnecessarily impede ethical and considered innovation and adoption.  Sweeping edicts prohibiting the use of AI in healthcare services are no longer viable or excusable.

Developments in the US also remind us how much can change with a change in government.  Let’s not forget what is happening closer to home, across the ditch, with health system cost savings and reforms so profound, senior leaders are leaving in droves.  New Zealand’s digital health branches have been among the most affected with hundreds of job losses.  This short-term cost saving is likely to cost New Zealanders in the long term.

With an election around the corner, will Australia also pivot away from key philosophies, policies and investments in digital health? 

AIDH’s soon-to-be released election statement calls for bi-partisan support of the key projects delivering connected care in Australia, and a commitment from whomever forms the next government to the continuation of necessary work. Digital health infrastructure is crucial to connecting disparate health systems, softening the effect of workforce shortages and modernising care.  It is not fodder for political point-scoring.

There are budgetary pressures to be addressed, and the Opposition has already signalled its intent to follow America’s lead in trimming government spending and focusing on efficiency.  This is to be expected.  Unfortunately, often it is the projects with long-term horizons that are the first to go as their return on investment is not immediate and the strategic risks are not insignificant.  The Health Information Exchange (HIE) is one example of such an initiative.

However, HIE is a necessary and pragmatic approach to addressing interoperability problems and the issues that plague My Health Record. This, along with initiatives to lift the digital capability of the workforce, should be viewed as necessary investments into a world-class healthcare system.

If budget cuts do occur, it is our sincere hope that those tasked with achieving cost savings do so in the manner intended: cutting out dead wood, minimising waste and addressing inefficiency.  The temptation to cease entire projects is high because it’s often the easier and more direct way to achieve substantial cost savings.  This would not be the right approach, unless the project in question is objectively failing in its outcomes.  Let’s not cut off limbs where we need to cut out fat.

In a world that is changing, we need sensible and purposeful decision-making by governments and their many stakeholders, characterised by balance and a future focus.  Innovation cannot be unbridled, and safeguards cannot suffocate.  Necessary cost savings should be considered and mindful of the future needs of our people and systems.  And as always, we need clever people to do courageous things.  One thing that is certain is that Australia deserves a world-class health system where patients receive high quality care and clinicians are empowered to be their best.  Let’s hope we achieve this.

Over to you: Share your view by Commenting below or going to our Poll:

We asked:

Are we at risk of a pivot from investment in digital health?

50% said YES