Page 866 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 27 March 1990

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


community can afford. I am sure the Assembly will agree that the Commonwealth Government has failed over many years to meet its responsibilities in the ACT. It has handed over to the people of Canberra a public hospital system which is run down and in need of substantial restructuring and upgrading.

The previous Government sought special funding from the Commonwealth to assist the ACT community to meet the cost of essential works. This Government has pressed the Commonwealth to provide $150m to help us upgrade and modernise our public hospitals. So far, this request has brought no response.

In all of this, one thing is clear. If the Commonwealth does not now meet its responsibilities and compensate the ACT community for its failure to properly maintain our hospitals, then the people of Canberra will be faced with a cost burden which will be very heavy indeed.

Mr Speaker, I turn now to options for public hospital redevelopment. During this Government's consideration of the options for public hospital redevelopment, five clear factors have emerged. First, there are substantial benefits in bringing together all major acute services. This will lead to real improvements in the quality of services offered. I know that the medical community of Canberra is united in its request for that to happen.

Secondly, significant ongoing recurrent savings are needed on the part of the Government as we move to meet an imminent drop of around $100m in Commonwealth funding to the ACT. Thirdly, major capital works are required now within the public hospital system. Fourthly, high class facilities are lying idle at Calvary Hospital and, fifthly, if a hospital is to close then it should be the Royal Canberra Hospital.

Maintaining the present arrangement of services rationalised across two sites - that is, a dual campus hospital service - would continue the existing problems of inadequate specialist cover across multiple sites and would not allow any of the advantages, in terms of quality, which flow from a single principal hospital development.

The essence of a principal hospital is to collocate all major specialties. This requires 600 to 700 beds in one place and not split across two or more sites. Such an arrangement would improve the quality of services by providing increased opportunities and encouragement for teaching, research, peer review and quality assurance processes. This proposition is strongly supported by a majority of the medical profession and most other interested groups. For these reasons the Government has committed itself to the development of a principal hospital.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .