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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 8 Hansard (27 June) . . Page.. 2363 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

There is a lot of money involved, over $200m. Therefore we really must have people who can manage that money, people who have expertise in that area". That is correct. I agree with that, and it must be administratively efficient. But, Chief Minister, you will have to explain to us how we are going to be sure that the community health care service side of this is going to be represented before I can support your position on this.

I should also point out that you did raise the issue of whether it should be the ANF who is represented, the HSUA, or whatever; and, to be fair to Mr Berry, "a member appointed by the Minister after taking into account consultation with the Trades and Labour Council of the ACT", I would think - - -

Mr Berry: It could be a metal worker.

Mrs Carnell: That is right. It more than likely would be.

MR MOORE: It is possible, you having consulted with them and decided you were not even going to - - -

Mr Berry: Somebody who has the confidence of all the other unions.

MR MOORE: Mr Berry interjects about somebody who has your confidence and their confidence. It may actually be quite separate. It may be, for example, a legal representative that they think will keep their interests in mind. That consultation having taken place, you may still decide not to appoint them. We had a good lesson on consultation from Mr Humphries - I think it was yesterday - about LAPACs.

Mr Berry's amendments are very broad. Really, they are demanding that you consult with these groups rather than take their representatives, unlike paragraph 15(1)(b) which says, quite specifically, that you must appoint somebody who is nominated by the University of Sydney. There is a quite significant difference in approach. I would have thought that Mr Berry had attempted to be quite reasonable in the approach that he has taken. That is how it looks to me. I want to know from you how I can be sure that the community care section is going to be represented on the board and what sort of broad consultation there will be before I am prepared to support your position on this issue.

MRS CARNELL (Chief Minister and Minister for Health and Community Care) (6.42): As I said, Mr Moore, my approach is to seek expressions of interest in the board from the whole community. Obviously, when we put together a board, we would need people who have a broad range of experience. To have people who had expertise only in hospitals and not in community care would make for a bad board. Remember, my reputation is riding on this. I am not going to have a board that simply cannot do the job. We certainly will be consulting with the various bodies. We certainly will be asking for expressions of interest from the trade union movement, from various community groups, and we will be putting it out in the newspaper.

Of course, at the end of the day, the Assembly gets the final decision. If the Assembly does not like the people that we have put forward it is quite capable of using its power in that area to say no, it is not on. We think that is an appropriate approach. We have supported disallowable instruments in terms of board membership in the past.

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