Page 1046 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 28 March 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
government here, the Follett-Whalan Government, attempting to make decisions on the basis of the Kearney report which came down in August 1989. I recall the comments made by Mr Berry at the time. They are in the Hansard of 24 August 1989 and, among other things, he said:
The Government recognises the need to decide the future directions for improving the ACT public hospital system quickly.
I stress the word "quickly". Despite that the Follett-Whalan Government procrastinated for months until it came up with a decision which, in effect, did away with all the research - it maintained three public hospitals in Canberra. I think everyone in town is of the opinion that we cannot afford three, but the then Government decided to take the easy way out and say that we would maintain three. That Government simply threw the ball back at the people and said, "Let's spend our money until we go bankrupt" - or something of that nature.
There was a very strong Canberra Times editorial on 9 November as a result. I do not propose to repeat its words; I thought it was a bit tough on Mr Berry, but it did talk about "irresponsibility" and "irresolution". Within three months of taking office, despite the Christmas break, the Alliance Government has taken the necessary decisions, the hard decisions. That is the quality of government, and that is something Mr Moore will never have the experience of - participating in government, making hard decisions and working very long hours to make those difficult decisions that are not directed solely at the electoral return that they may reap.
Certainly our Government is underwriting its re-election on the basis of the very sensible baling out of our finances that will result from this decision. The suggestion that there has been a lack of consultation is patently absurd. There is probably no better traversed issue in Canberra in recent years than the hospital issue, no more consulted issue and no more open, demonstrative issue. The fact is that we have taken a hard decision.
Cost is crucial in some matters of government, and clearly my colleagues have spoken already in relation to those matters. But certainly, as a government, we now have to face the long institutional path of putting our blueprint into action. As the leader of the Residents Rally, I am very pleased to say that not only have we delivered other policy matters but in this case we have delivered again. I read into the record the Residents Rally policy. It says:
The Royal Canberra Hospital will be retained under a Residents Rally administration.
This is not a Residents Rally administration; the Rally did not gain Government in its own right. But the Rally policy went on to say:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .