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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1995 Week 10 Hansard (5 December) . . Page.. 2630 ..

MRS CARNELL (continuing):

go to the doctor that often and it is not a responsibility of this Government. If we end up making it our responsibility it means that mental health services suffer, children's services suffer, all of the community things that are our responsibility suffer. That is exactly what Mr Connolly said. So we are trying desperately to get that focus back on the areas where there are real gaps in health provision in the ACT.

That takes me to point No. 3 in this motion. It talks about the sale of government-owned health centres. Again, I do not want to spend precious health dollars keeping half empty health centres open. At Melba it is three-quarters empty, probably seven-eighths empty. I want to spend that money on services to the community. That is our responsibility here in this Assembly, not to keep ageing buildings that are not full. In fact, under the previous Government, we got down to a situation at Melba where there were two doctors and a receptionist; that is all. At Kippax, under those opposite, the centre was half empty. I do not think that we should be spending ACT government dollars and health dollars keeping those sorts of centres going. We can sell them. We can spend the money, as in this health budget, on health services. The money does not go back into the great bottomless pit of Consolidated Revenue; it goes back into health services - exactly where it should be. That is the approach that this Government has taken. It is service delivery that counts, not bricks and mortar. That has to be the way to go.

With regard to the second part of the motion - the suggestions about Jindalee - I will quote to you from a letter that I received today from the HSUA. It says:

The HSUA members note the Government's response to the outstanding issues and resolve not to implement the threatened bans, and to lift the bans currently in place.

The reality is that this Government has stuck to its words exactly. I am going to quote the words exactly, if I can find them. We have said categorically that we will include long-term casual staff, as I said in this place, in redundancy, redeployment or retraining. We stand by that exactly. I think all those opposite would have seen the response we had to Bert Tolley's letter, or requirements from the Government. If not, there is a copy here that I am willing to table. It states that the ACT Government stands by its promise that long-term casuals - that means people who have worked regularly for longer than 12 months - - -

Mr Berry: That is a new backdown.

MRS CARNELL: It is exactly what I said in the Assembly.

Mr Berry: A new backdown.

MRS CARNELL: It is exactly what I said in the Assembly.

Mr Berry: No, it is not.

MRS CARNELL: It is not, Mr Berry? Would you like to find the bit in Hansard where I did not say "long-term casuals"?

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