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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 5 Hansard (14 May) . . Page.. 1169 ..

Mr De Domenico: What is a separation rate?

MR BERRY: Of course, Mrs Carnell knew that the cost of those separations was going to impact on the health budget.

Mr De Domenico: Separations?

MR BERRY: Ask the Health Minister. She might be able to tell you what a separation is - only might.

Mrs Carnell: Is he talking about redundancies? That comes from the central redundancy pool. It has nothing to do with the health budget.

MR BERRY: Mrs Carnell does not seem to understand what a separation is. If she has a look at one of her Woden Valley Hospital information bulletin patient activity data sheets - - -

Mrs Carnell: Oh, you mean admissions.

MR BERRY: No, no, no. Go down to Table 1, paragraph 2, separations, and look at total separations. You will see that in July 1995 - Mrs Carnell would have had this on her desk - there was a 5.3 per cent increase in separations in the first month of her budget. That is separations. That is another little education lesson. In the context of a $303m budget and a commitment to 55,000 separations, Mrs Carnell knew that the budget was blowing out in July and did nothing. That is where the big cover-up is.

Mrs Carnell: Aren't we naughty! We saw more patients.

Mr De Domenico: Close some wards down. That is what we should have done.

MR SPEAKER: Order! Mr Berry has the floor.

MR BERRY: Mrs Carnell has to understand that if she puts up a budget which is inadequate, if there is insufficient money, she has to wear the responsibility for her mismanagement. Obviously, at the outset, this budget was light on. Her management has been light on from the word go, as has been demonstrated by these activity reports and her inability to demonstrate to the committee of inquiry that she chose to do anything about it. The fact of the matter is that she chose to do nothing, and that was clearly proven. Mr Kaine, I can understand why you did not try to defend Mrs Carnell's management of the health budget. It is outrageously poor and is deserving of the censure motion recently passed by this Assembly. I have no more to say in relation to the management of the health budget. I will now go to the issue of the propriety of this approach.

Clearly, Mr Speaker, the approach that has been taken by Mrs Carnell appropriates an additional $14.2m for whatever use the Government chooses - any use at all. It also allows the Government to borrow another $14.2m. It does not require them to spend all of the $14.2m. Indeed, Mrs Carnell's officials could not demonstrate to the committee whether they were going to spend $1 or $14.2m, or where they were going

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