Page 670 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 20 May 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
We obviously need to establish better arrangements as between the States and the Commonwealth with respect to funding, and hospital services are no less in that category than any other area of government activity. It is my view that the question of the Commonwealth's role in the funding of ACT health services has been underplayed for some time now. I maintained when I was Minister - I think the present Minister will recall the exchanges at the time about the question of the Commonwealth's role - that there needs to be much more strength put into the campaign to make the Commonwealth face up to the question of adequately reflecting its responsibility for funding our health services.
It is particularly important in the ACT, Madam Speaker, because only a little over three years ago we inherited all of our health services and health facilities from the Commonwealth, and in some cases they were in a very badly deteriorated state. The Royal Canberra Hospital is a very good case in point. For us to not be hammering on the door of the Commonwealth demanding better arrangements from the Commonwealth is not acceptable.
We have to take this fight to the Commonwealth and argue our case trenchantly for as long as we need to. It sounds to me, although of course I was not there, as though there were sympathetic voices for a better arrangement in favour of the States and Territories coming from such quarters, as I understand, as the Western Australian Minister for Health who, as I recall from my own meetings, is a fairly individual sort of character and is likely to defend - - -
Mr Berry: He broke ranks.
MR HUMPHRIES: He certainly broke ranks and I think it indicates that he felt strongly that the States needed to be better placed vis-a-vis the Commonwealth. That has been my position for some time. I sincerely hope that he and the Ministers from conservative States, who voted together on this issue at the Health Ministers Conference, will be joined in due course by the ACT Health Minister in ensuring that the ACT in particular gets a fair deal as part of better and more certain arrangements for the States and Territories.
MRS CARNELL (4.18): To lead on from Mr Humphries's statement, I found that Mr Berry, in his report on the Australian Health Ministers Conference, gave a rather bland statement about what was really a very important and controversial conference. The new Medicare agreement was an agenda item. The content and nature of this agreement will impact greatly on the future of the public hospital system in Australia. I and my party believe strongly in an accessible, universal health system as one of the most important aspects of the quality of life that we really all enjoy in Australia.
What the Minister neglected to indicate in his statement on Wednesday, 13 May, was that three States and the Northern Territory reserved their position on points in the AHMAC position paper - in other words, half the Commonwealth. Consensus was not developed on a number of agenda items. No decision was able to be made by the Health Ministers with regard to the form and level of hospital funding grants. This buck was passed to the Premiers so that they could decide at their conference on 6 June. New South Wales, Tasmania, the Northern Territory and Western Australia - a Labor State, which is obviously much more concerned about the realities of hospital funding than the others, unfortunately including the ACT - reserved their position that private health insurance should be included amongst the issues to be discussed by the Premiers on 6 June.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .