Page 745 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 12 March 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The other aspect of what this Government has been doing in the health budget had to do with reducing the administrative infrastructure. We have done that. You would not give us any credit for it. You would never acknowledge that we have eliminated a whole layer of administrative on-cost that you were prepared to support. You had never even looked at it. You had no concern for that - none whatsoever. This Government, through this Minister, has examined the way that the health system is administered in the city. We have faced up to the fact that there was an administrative on-cost there that we could not afford, and we have removed it. That represents a very significant saving in the total cost of operating our public health system.
I said that Mr Humphries had successfully defended himself against this absurd accusation. He did not really need anything from me; but the facts are the facts, and some of them needed to be put on the table. These wild, fantastic accusations that are made by members of the Opposition need to be put in some sort of perspective. I have done that. I can assure them that Mr Humphries has my total support as Minister. I believe that he is doing an excellent job in the interests of this community and that he will still be doing it at this time next year.
MR MOORE (4.25): Mr Humphries said that there is nothing new about the situation. When we look back to the Hansard of 15 November, Mr Humphries is totally correct. At that time there was a budget blow-out when Mr Berry was Minister and the statement, "Only a fool would pretend that there is not, in our hospital system in the ACT at present, a crisis", was absolutely true. Mr Berry's management of the health budget at the time was totally incompetent. That is something that the Alliance Government has referred to again and again - the $7m budget blow-out that Mr Berry brought about. That is true. There is no doubt about it.
At the time when Mr Berry was accused, in November, he had been in government for about six months. They had taken over a new government and it would, of course, take some time for him to come to grips with those problems. That he failed to do so indicates that his management was inadequate as a Minister. The arguments presented by Mr Humphries for him resigning were appropriate.
How much worse is it for Mr Humphries, who has had the benefit of the report about the problem that Labor commissioned at that time? The report was brought down under the Alliance Government. How much worse is it for Mr Humphries who has had 15 months - more than double the amount of time - to take on a problem that he knew existed when he took over? How much worse is it for Mr Humphries, not to have a $7m blow-out that was across not only the hospitals but also community services, but to have a $12m blow-out? If you combine it with $1.9m - call it $2m - from Mr Collaery, because you combine Community Services and Health, we are now talking of a $14m blow-out on the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .