Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

None . . Page.. 725 ..

who were offered contracts who have actually signed. Savings in the vicinity of $2m have been achieved from the new contracts. We believe that it will be more than $2m; but, until we actually have the final contracts in, we will not be able to have a final figure there, as Mr Connolly would be aware.

We are very happy to make those contracts available to the Public Accounts Committee for scrutiny. We fully believe that they should be scrutinised. We believe strongly that contracts between individuals and the ACT Government should not necessarily be available to the public generally, particularly as there are a number of issues involved with that; but that this Assembly should be able to see them. We are pleased with the $2m figure, particularly when you take into account that the previous Government - in its efforts to solve this dispute over some two years - in March 1994, in a written submission to the VMO arbitrator, Justice Gordon Samuels, put forward a proposal to save $1.07m from these contracts. Of course, the vast percentage of the contracts that were going to be signed as part of that - - -

Mr Connolly: But be fully truthful here, Mrs Carnell. What was our final position?

MRS CARNELL: I have the document here.

Mr Hird: Are you saying that the Chief Minister has not been truthful?

Mr Connolly: She has not been fully truthful.

MRS CARNELL: In the position put to Justice Gordon Samuels in March 1994, there was a saving of approximately $1.07m - that is all - with a mix of sessional and fee-for-service contracts. From there, Mr Connolly started to predict savings of some $4m. But what did Mr Connolly save? Zero, because he did not get one signature on one dotted line. The facts of the matter are that it was an absolute, total failure. The only document in writing suggested $1.07m. Mr Connolly spoke about $4m; but he achieved nothing, simply because agreement could not be reached at that figure.

What we have achieved is savings in excess of $2m. We do have signatures on bottom lines. We do have a hospital system that is going forward. But, most importantly, we actually have cooperation between the doctors and the hospital system to achieve the sorts of extra reforms that we have to achieve. Do you know how we have done that, Mr Speaker? We have done that by not calling doctors “predators”, by not calling them “leeches on society”, but by dealing with them as the professionals they are. That is the same way that we will deal with nurses, other health professionals and other people who work in our health system.

MR CONNOLLY: I ask, by way of a supplementary question: Mrs Carnell, how can you expect those nurses and other professionals who work in the health system to cooperate in things like your steering committee when you persistently refuse to make available the details of these settlements? You have promised today to make the contracts available to the Public Accounts Committee; but the information which I have repeatedly

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .