Page 2657 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 13 August 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The Alliance Government strategy also included a new 150-bed private hospital. Tenders were called earlier this year. A prime greenfield site on the banks of Lake Ginninderra was to be used. There was much community concern about the use of that site. Whilst the Labor Government agrees that there is a place for private hospitals, we cannot accept a strategy such as that of the former Government, based on forcing people into the more expensive private system at a time when they are less able to afford it.
Mr Humphries: It does not cost us anything.
MR BERRY: Mr Humphries says that it costs us nothing. When I say "us", I talk about the community. Everybody knows that it costs more because the people out there who have to use the services have to pay more to use them or they have to buy expensive private hospital insurance so that they can get into those more expensive beds. We know that people are dropping off private insurance because of the difficulties they are experiencing in the economy.
The real problem for the community has been in the area of public beds. Clearly, there is no demand for such a facility in the current environment. Our private hospital beds are underutilised; you cannot deny that. There are 95 approved private beds in the ACT which are unused because there is no demand for them.
Mr Humphries: That is rubbish. Why do they want to build more, in that case? Why did John James ask for another 50 beds a few months ago?
MR BERRY: This former Minister still bleats about the need for a private hospital. There is no demand; there is very little interest - other than from the former Minister on philosophical grounds, no more than that.
Mr Duby: Rubbish! There is a big demand on the public beds.
MR BERRY: Of course there is a demand on the public beds because there are too few of them and there are inadequate services, which was brought about by the former Alliance Government. The people who want services in our hospitals are not demanding private beds, otherwise the 95 that are not being used now would be in use. Let us stop kidding ourselves. Anybody who takes that argument has been snowed; they have been conned. We are committed to providing sufficient public hospital beds to meet demand from our community. We see no need for such a private hospital facility and we will not proceed with the proposal.
We believe that the demand for private hospital beds can be adequately met by those currently approved for John James and Calvary hospitals. We recognise that in the future the space being used at Calvary Hospital for private beds may
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .