Page 2571 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 15 November 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Berry: Why did you want me to table it, if you had it?
MR HUMPHRIES: So that we could all read it, Minister. The acting chairman said:
I reiterate the Board's commitment to delivering the best-possible level of care with the funds available. We sympathise with your dilemma in balancing effective budget management against the difficult political imperatives. But, to be frank: time is running out and some firm political resolve and support is needed if the Board is expected to meet your budget priority.
We can all see, can we not, why the Minister yesterday was so anxious not to have this letter tabled? The acting chairman went on:
Year-to-date operating expenditure is $39.1m which is $2.5m over the monthly pro-rata allocation of available funds.
The Minister yesterday was unable to confirm this was the case. I continue:
Whilst continuation of over-spending at the same rate would result in a $10m deficit in operating expenses, there are several initiatives currently in place that will, we estimate, halve this effect.
I draw attention to those words, Mr Speaker, because they indicate clearly that the Minister's attempt yesterday in effect to cast aspersions on the view that there was a $10m blow-out was simply a diversionary tactic.
The board made it quite clear here - and we would all have known that if he had been prepared to table this letter - that the $10m deficit is being contained by proper measures to restrict growth in the hospital expenditure budget. But he also made it clear that further things had to be done. You could have made that clear, Minister, and you did not. He went on to say:
The tough options follow: Our priority - doubtless in step with your political realities - is to identify major cost-saving initiatives which will have minimal effect on patient care. I know you are not entirely comfortable with the industrial consequences, but the choices, short of additional funding, are running out.
He went on to list those choices:
1. The introduction of productivity measures in food preparation and food distribution.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .