Page 383 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 23 February 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
In the Minister's speech he referred to the fact that access to public hospital services is to be on the basis of clinical need, and that also applies to referrals to booking lists. I sought from the officers of ACT Health who provided me with a briefing yesterday clarification regarding the definition of booking lists and whether they were the same as waiting lists. Booking lists are different from waiting lists. Waiting lists refer to the number of people who are waiting for elective surgery. Booking lists refer to the number of people who have booked times for elective surgery. I believe that it is important that both lists continue to be kept to inform the community of the exact situation with regard to access to health services. The continuation of the role of the quality assurance committees is to be commended. As the Minister has outlined in his speech, these committees fulfil an important function in assessing and evaluating health services and, in particular, in investigating deaths in hospitals. It is important that this work continue.
I now wish to refer to the explanatory memorandum for the Bill - this is the Health Bill 1993 - which points out in relation to clause 5, "Medicare principles and commitments", the important role of an independent complaints body. It is stated that the complaints body needs to be independent of both hospitals and the Department of Health, that it will have powers to investigate, conciliate and adjudicate upon complaints and that it will have a role in recommending improvements in the delivery of hospital services. The Minister has developed a discussion paper on an independent complaints body which has been in circulation for community comment for some time. Given the passage of these Bills, it is important that that work be finalised and an independent complaints body be brought into being.
It was stated in the Canberra Times on 17 February this year that Health's methods of purchasing, accountability and engaging staff were different from the more rigid departmental requirements. Presumably the change which enables Health to operate as a department will lead to significant improvements in these areas and should be seen by the community as positive. The Department of Health is accountable and responsible to the Minister for Health, Mr Berry, who in turn is accountable to this Assembly. If Mr Berry wishes to be fully accountable to this Assembly for ACT Health, then it is my belief that we should enable him to be so by supporting the abolition of the board.
It is my understanding that the chief executive of Health, Ms Gillian Biscoe, will chair an audit committee of which the Auditor-General of the ACT will be a representative. The Auditor-General will also continue to audit ACT Health for the next three years. The community will have every right to have faith in the process which will be overseen by such scrutiny.
Finally, I wish to address the issue of the timing and scheduling of debate of these Bills. I supported Mr Humphries's motion earlier today which noted the indecent haste with which Bills have been coming forward for consideration by this Assembly. I believe, and I have stated on a number of previous occasions, that legislation which is introduced in one sitting period should not normally be debated until the next or subsequent sitting period. I have also stated that the Government should always have the prerogative to declare a Bill or Bills to be urgent. However, in declaring a Bill urgent the Government needs to consider the parameters of the debate which will then necessarily take place.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .