Please describe your concerns with this comment. If you simply wish to respond to the comment please use the Comment Box on the story itself:
This appears to be extremely naive financial management. From Hunter Adam himself, or his Finance chief, if there is one? If ops/treatments are needed the costs have to be met, and the sooner the better, and the budget is not relevant, as it is only a guide. Putting it off by a few months only changes the financial reporting. The same amount of money will be spent, perhaps even more. 2012 or 2013, so what? Does anything not get done in 2013 because operations and/or treatment from 2012 were delayed? Budgets are guides in such cases, not absolutes. Or should be. This looks like a panic reaction that has not been thought through - or was he under pressure, or badly advised? Some good words for the Press? The real answer lies in reducing costs in 2013, and setting realistic and stringent budgets. But with hospital and emergency services there will always be the unexpected which cannot be budgeted for other than as a provision. Is there a provision for 2012, or 2013? If not there should be, otherwise it is not realistic. I find it hard to believe that I have had to make these comments in 2012, and on an Island that prides itself on Financial Management - or is that only for others?