Page 1132 - Week 04 - Thursday, 21 April 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
That is fair enough; but the VMOs ought to be called upon as well, I believe, to lodge only strictly correct and accurate claims for payment. It is their responsibility to do so in the first instance, I believe.
On the other hand, sessional payment arrangements, covered in chapter 4 of our report, raise a different set of concerns. The practitioner is required to maintain a record of the dates and times medical services have been provided. The Auditor-General has suggested that improvements can be gained by ACT Health's proper verification of those records. Whilst that is a constructive comment, I again refer to the moral and legal obligation of the practitioners involved in honouring their contractual arrangements and in supplying correct and proper records.
Another area of concern to me was the Auditor-General's finding that an estimated 1,000 public patient admissions each year contain some element of irregularity in the payments to treating doctors. Whilst there was some question as to the regularity or level of this sort of fraud, there is no room, in my view, for any level of fraud. The report goes into some detail in outlining ways of reducing or eliminating the possibility of fraud. I am pleased to see these developments, and I endorse completely the recommendation the committee has made at paragraph 6.21.
Whilst our chapter 7 discusses a number of issues raised by the Auditor-General in relation to obstetrics, I am particularly concerned with the matter of hospital booking fees. The Auditor-General explains in detail the reasons why he could not examine the allegations as part of the audit. The allegations were sufficient, though, for him to mention this issue in his report. He says in his report that the reason he could not verify those allegations was that the alleged fees would have been paid directly to the doctor and not received in ACT or Commonwealth records. Obviously our committee was not in a position either to generate evidence on those allegations.
I must say, though, that in a personal conversation I had with acquaintances of mine - people, in fact, I have known for many years - they mentioned that in the past a member of their family had encountered the obstetrics booking fee practice. It is, to me, totally and absolutely unacceptable that such manipulative and corrupt practices should take place. Our committee has made a recommendation at paragraph 7.31, and I take this opportunity to strongly urge the adoption of this recommendation, particularly in relation to future contracts for VMOs. On the attitude displayed by the AMA on this issue, I believe that they would agree, with no query at all, that proof of any practitioner pursuing this practice deserves nothing less than cessation of contract. I am confident of the AMA's stance on that issue.
I want to take the opportunity of thanking my committee colleagues for the way in which our deliberations occurred over an issue that was sometimes fairly heated. My thanks also go to the committee secretary and secretariat for their assistance in the course of the inquiry and in the production of the report. Along with the chair, I endorse the report to the Assembly.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .