In order to provide tax cuts, the government should decrease spending on health?

On average, everyone strongly disagrees with consensus between 189 voters.

Reasons To Disagree

Just dump the expensive DHB's and move the bulk of the money from administration and Management and get it to the coal face where the work needs to be done. Having doubled the surgical budget in 10 years we have only seen a 10% increase in total operations, the rest is lost in administrative waste.

Health is a major spending priority. You can give tax cuts but inflation means it will erode current health spending and you will have to decrease health provisions. Plus to keep doctors and nurses here you really should pay them more not less

Improve direction of spending along the lines of Oz - health insurance is the answer - scrap the bureaucratic nightmare we currently suffer from

Review the administration associated with Health care. Let Drs do their jobs and reduce the number of paper pushers if need be to make the health dollar go further, but cutting spending is probably not a good idea

robbing peter to pay Paul never works whatever the reason, you only transfer the deficit from one party to the other, since the source of the tax cut is a non-productive entity. Tax cuts should originate from an income source not a liability.

Reasons To Agree

Not convinced that money spent on health is as efficiently used as it should be.

1. To provide 'Public Health' there must be tax. 2. Tax is theft. 3. The ends can never justify the means. Therefore 'Public Health' is evil.