Page 4107 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 24 November 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR BERRY: Mrs Humphries - I have done it again; I have this bee in my bonnet.
Ms Follett: They are interchangeable.
MR BERRY: Interchangeable.
Mr Humphries: Come on, Mr Follett; get on with it.
MR BERRY: Thank you. So we end up with this continual misleading of the community on these issues, and that cannot be allowed to continue. Around Australia the public health system employs approximately one-third of all employees who work for the various governments and, as the Chief Minister has stated, reduced Grants Commission funding requires each government agency to leave no stone unturned in order to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of their service delivery. It is the same in ACT Health. When faced with change, organisations face three choices: Do nothing and go under; join together with all the players and work together to achieve changes that will benefit the community and workers; or, thirdly, actively resist change. Unfortunately, some of the key groups in the health industry seem to be choosing to actively resist progressive change rather than working with us to achieve the best possible health system in Australia.
Mrs Carnell is bleating about a crisis in our health system. The only crisis is being caused by the greedy specialists who are refusing to sign contracts. That is where the crisis is being caused. During question time - - -
Mrs Carnell: But the nurses are all right.
MR BERRY: The nurses have gone to the Industrial Relations Commission. That is where I would like the doctors to go to. During question time I outlined some of the tactics being used by the specialists controlling the AMA hot line. I agree that there is a need to resolve this crisis and I have referred the matter to the Industrial Relations Commission. The other areas that Mrs Carnell has referred to relate to the restructuring of our health system to ensure that it delivers quality and efficient health services.
In relation to VMOs, what is the health crisis that the Opposition refers to? As I have said, it is the result of the VMOs walking out of Canberra's public hospital system; nothing else. They are on strike; there is no question about that. The VMOs are using patients as pawns in what can only be described as a money-grubbing exercise. Canberra's VMOs want absolute security of employment, a better deal than anyone else in the community has, and Mrs Carnell is on the privileged side of things. The contracts they want would give them a job for life. Mrs Carnell thinks they ought to get it. She also thinks they ought to get paid what they like. They want the right to choose when and where they work, without any assessment of the work. Mrs Carnell supports that. How can you support that? They want pay increases that most employees dream about. Mrs Carnell supports that because they are the privileged, and one would expect her to do so.
As the information in the following table shows, VMOs have set up their indexation so that over the last three years they have achieved consistently better outcomes than the average Australian worker. I explained during question time that the changes in 1991 ranged from 3.1 per cent in average weekly earnings for workers to 10 per cent for anaesthetists and 5 per cent for general practitioners.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .