Page 2729 - Week 09 - Thursday, 25 August 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
the ACT Government can encourage a not-for-profit nursing home, hopefully, to set up in the Belconnen area. Maybe the Government would like to look back to the Social Policy Committee's recommendations along those lines on how to achieve that, and then we would be able to get over a problem - - -
Debate interrupted.
ADJOURNMENT
MADAM SPEAKER: Order! It being 4.30 pm, I propose the question:
That the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mr Berry: I require the question to be put forthwith without debate.
Question resolved in the negative.
APPROPRIATION BILL 1994-95
[COGNATE PAPER:
ESTIMATES 1994-95 - SELECT COMMITTEE - REPORT ON THE APPROPRIATION BILL 1994-95]
Detail Stage
Debate resumed.
MRS CARNELL: Then we would be able to get over a problem where precious health dollars are being spent funding 20 nursing home beds that cannot pick up a Commonwealth Government subsidy because of where they are placed. They are very good nursing home beds. There is no doubt about that. What we have to do is try to maximise our health dollar. You know that.
Mr Berry: So, who would pay for them?
MRS CARNELL: The not-for-profit sector, Mr Berry. That is exactly what the recommendation says. Read your own recommendation. That is what it says.
The other thing which I found really amusing was the Government's attempt to explain the provision of private obstetrics bed figures. What the committee was saying is that the $1.1m in savings could be achieved only if those 1,400 separations were not replaced by any separations, whether they be day patients or whatever. If one of those separations is replaced - Mr Connolly knows that this is the truth - then the $1.1m simply is not saved; it is just diverted somewhere else.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .