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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1995 Week 10 Hansard (6 December) . . Page.. 2745 ..

MR OSBORNE (continuing):

I have to say, Mr Speaker, that my big concern over this is that I could play politics on the whole issue. I could force Mrs Carnell over the next years to just let them run down and let there be no doctors in the health centres until she finds people who are prepared to 100 per cent bulk-bill. However, the big thing we need to look at is that I think most people are concerned about the ancillary services at these different places, and I would think that the best excuse we can give Mrs Carnell to remove them is if there are no doctors there. At the end of the day I think we need to be realistic about this issue. I am prepared to give Mrs Carnell perhaps until the first sitting day next year to try at least to get some completely bulk-billing doctors into these health service centres. I think we, as an Assembly, need to look beyond that. If that cannot happen, given the irresponsible attitude of ignoring our motion and allowing the salaried doctors that we have to go, we do not have very many options. I do not think you can disagree. As I said, I could stand here and demand that Mrs Carnell bring the salaried doctors back; but, at the end of the day, if she is unable to do that, do we let them be empty? Do we let them run down? Do we give her an excuse to remove the ancillary services?

As I said, Mr Speaker, I have to be realistic on this issue. I admit that I may have to back down on it next year, but I am hoping that, over the Christmas break, Mrs Carnell will try a little bit harder than placing a couple of ads in a local magazine, or whatever it was that was done. I believe there are plenty of other avenues that she could explore to try to fill the spots with 100 per cent bulk-billing doctors. Maybe there are some doctors out there who are not greedy; but, given the history of the doctors - the VMO dispute comes to mind - I am not very hopeful.

Mr Speaker, in relation to paragraph (2) of Mr Connolly's motion, do I need to seek leave to move these amendments?

MR SPEAKER: You can foreshadow them, Mr Osborne.

MR OSBORNE: I will foreshadow them, Mr Speaker. I propose to add after "casual staff" the words "employed for longer than six months". I know that Mrs Carnell gave an undertaking yesterday that it would be for people employed for longer than 12 months, but I think that we need to find a happy medium there for the nurses and other people employed at Jindalee. I think that anyone employed for longer than six months would consider themselves to be long term, so I will be supporting Mr Connolly's motion with my amendment. That amendment does backdate from the date that Jindalee is privatised, which I think is next February. I think that takes it back to before the announcement that it was going to be sold. I have spoken to the unions about it and they are pleased with that outcome.

In relation to paragraph (3), Mr Speaker, I propose to omit "government-owned health centres" and substitute "Kippax Health Centre" because I believe that a blanket call for the sale of government health centres is not the right way to go about it. I believe that they need to be looked at individually. I agree with Mr Berry, who has campaigned long and hard on behalf of his constituents out there. I am a little miffed about why members of the Government who represent that area have not been quite as vocal.

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