Page 243 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 13 February 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR STEFANIAK (4.06): I have a number of points. I refer firstly to the question of the comparison between ambulance and fire stations. In relation to that, fire engines need to be on location for strategic response to buildings, unlike ambulances. Ambulance operations no longer operate from stations as they are deployed on a mobile basis, and ambulances will be where the patient demand is occurring. Calwell station has been talked about a lot in this debate. Calwell station, in fact, is often closed as there is no demand upon it, and the ambulance there is often working in the Woden area.
Mr Connolly: Mrs Nolan does not look reassured by that statement, Bill.
MR STEFANIAK: Do not worry about that. On-station is not relevant to ambulance response times. That comes from the chief ambulance officer, a person who should know what he is talking about.
Mr Berry: But I will bet he says that there should be four crews.
MR STEFANIAK: I will come to that in a minute, because I have a little bit of personal knowledge about how the ambulances operated when you were the Minister, Wayne, which we have not really come to yet. I think you are probably in a rather fragile glass house throwing a few stones which might well boomerang back on you. Indeed, speaking of Mr Berry's propensity to perhaps exaggerate a situation, I refer members to a question he asked on 25 October 1990, which was taken on notice by the current Minister, Mr Humphries. Mr Berry asked:
Is the Minister aware of the case of a 15-year-old boy with a paraspinal abscess and a risk of paraplegia who required an ambulance to take him to Sydney for an evaluation of his condition, who could not get an ambulance and whose parents, who have ambulance cover ... had to borrow a station wagon and put a mattress in it? His doctor had to modify his intravenous drip and provide antibiotics and extra pain-killing drugs so that he could make the trip in an unsatisfactory vehicle, with increased risks and pain from his condition, and in breach of road safety rules.
Mr Humphries responded on Wednesday, 12 December; it is in Hansard. He stated:
The answer to Mr Berry's question is:
I understand the ACT Ambulance Service received a call from the boy's doctor at 7.30 pm on Wednesday 24 October 1990, requesting an ambulance to transport a patient by road to Sydney, for an appointment at 9.00 am on Thursday 25 October 1990.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .