A Case for Government Ownership of Primary Care Services in New Zealand: Weighing the Arguments

Abstract

Primary care services provide continuing and coordinating care, cater to most health care needs, and serve as a point of first contact with the health system. This article addresses the issue of government ownership of primary care. Ownership confers governance responsibility (ultimate control) for an organization, and accountability for its actions. Primary care organizations can be classed as government owned and operated or privately owned and operated, the latter with or without community governance. The authors address two policy questions: Does the ownership form of a primary care organization matter? What ownership frameworks should be used to guide policy-making? Arguments for and against government ownership are examined from political and economic perspectives, informed by a governance framework. Government ownership of primary care may solve problems associated with private for-profit ownership that are related to lack of control of strategic assets, lack of direct political accountability, contracting, and market failure, but it may raise potential problems of lack of responsiveness to minority and local needs and capture by interest groups. In response to the problems associated with government ownership, community-governed private nonprofits have an essential role as a vehicle for indigenous self-determination, catering for minority populations, experimenting with policy options, and providing public goods particularly for minority populations. The authors argue that private organizations that lack community governance have a lesser role.