mous long-running soap opera starts each episode with the doleful announcement that “like sands through the hourglass, so are the days of our lives”.

In Australia in 2015, we could modernise the prologue by saying “another health minister, another review of Medicare”.

As with the soapie, we are likely to see the same cast of stock characters play out the same plots, with the same outcomes.

In the face of irrefutable evidence, we cling to a model of healthcare that remains resolutely resistant to change.

Related Opinion:

• AMA’s ‘bleak’ outlook for hospitals strengthens premiers’ case on funding
• Medicare review must deal with ‘elephant in the room’ incentives

The term ‘white elephant’ comes from the ancient Indian tradition of gifting such a beast to your troublesome vassals in the knowledge that the cost of keeping such a wonderful creature would bankrupt said vassal and leave them without the resources to seriously challenge you.

The Australian public has been led to believe that hospital beds are the currency of health GDP in this country.

But in many respects, each new bed is simply another white elephant — an insatiable and bottomless pit in terms of the funding needed to maintain it, and firmly anchored in a reactive healthcare system steadfastly resistant to change.

Related News:

• GPs divided over call to ‘choose wisely’
• Your MBS item hit list
• Full details of chronic disease funding revamp

Last month’s announcement by Federal Health Minister Sussan Ley of a comprehensive review of Medicare would be welcome if we could be confident that any recommendations would translate into sensible action.

A week earlier, we learned from the leaked National Mental Health Commission report that respected economist Professor Allan Fels, who chaired the commission, had recommended a large-scale shift in funding from hospitals to GPs and the community, but neither the report nor the recommendation appear destined for adoption, with Ms Ley ruling out shifting the suggested $1 billion in mental health funding from secondary to primary and community care.

Perhaps someone should let the minister know that a quarter of a century of additional life expectancy has been granted to each Australian since the Anzacs landed at Gallipoli, and health analysts clearly attribute most of the improvement to fundamental increases in standards of living (eg, housing, sanitation and health literacy), basic preventive measures such as vaccination, and an improved identification and management of chronic disease within community-based health services.

The message is clear. As a profession, we remain committed to alleviating the suffering of those who are acutely ill, but increased investment in health services at a preventive and primary care level will result in a better return for every dollar invested in health.

Professor Fels’ recommendations simply add to what is already a strong evidence base for the need to reform our health funding allocations.

Yet Minister Ley’s announcement of the Medicare review stops short of acknowledging the issue of an underfunded community health sector, including general practice.

The establishment of a primary health care advisory group is a positive move.

The minister has consulted widely and appears to understand the drivers in healthcare, but the current government has so far shown little commitment to nurturing primary healthcare, instead freezing Medicare rebates, reducing overall funding to the new Primary Health Networks and significantly disrupting general practice training systems.

We know that there is unlikely to be significant additional funding injected into the health sector.

In our current economic situation, we must accept this as a prudent and pragmatic position, but without commitment to act on what is clear evidence of the need for reform, it is hard to be optimistic that policymakers will embrace change.

The current healthcare script in this country is unidimensional, with hospital beds inevitably cast in the leading role, and any attempt to control their growth reported as a villainous act.

Any change in the public perception will require vision and collaboration, but it is surely time to give the audience a new story.

Professor Willcock is professor of general practice at the University of Sydney.