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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 5 Hansard (14 May) . . Page.. 1431 ..

MR BERRY (continuing):

(2) waiting lists before and after they were varied along with the formula or `national data set' application which gave rise to adjusted waiting list figures.

Mr Speaker, this motion arose out of the publication of some figures from our hospitals in relation to waiting lists which showed a fairly dramatic increase over the Christmas period. Members will recall that the figures appeared in the Canberra Times. The article was responded to by the Health Minister's office and it was claimed that the increase was seasonal. Later on we discovered in question time in this place that there were some other factors involved and that there was some sort of a review, or recount or reassessment of the hospital numbers.

The motion speaks for itself, Mr Speaker. It seeks all of the details which led to the adjustment of the ACT public hospital waiting lists. It also, in paragraph (2), seeks some details of the waiting lists before and after they were varied. Mr Speaker, again for the sake of brevity, I will try to guess what Mrs Carnell is trying to do with her amendment, but I may need to seek leave to speak again if I am wrong.

Mrs Carnell: You will not have to, because you can speak to my amendment after I move it.

MR BERRY: Okay. For the sake of brevity anyway, I will say a couple of words against it. I think the amendment circulated merely restricts the level of information that I would be able to get hold of. I would rather leave the motion as it is, to ensure that all of the details are available rather than just the details that found their way to the Chief Minister. I recall, Mr Speaker, a revelation of changed counting arrangements for waiting lists in the hospital system. I was able to see a register which was filled in in pencil and a loose-leaf folder used in the counting of waiting lists. Rather than exclude access to all details by restricting it to just the information that found its way to the Chief Minister, I think I would err on the side of safety and oppose the amendment. I recommend that members do the same.

MRS CARNELL (Chief Minister and Minister for Health and Community Care) (5.25): Mr Berry obviously does not realise the reason why this recount was done. Mr Speaker, there was an internal review of waiting lists, which I was quite open about when Mr Berry asked the question about this. There is certainly nothing to hide in this area. The review was done in accordance with the requirement of the purchase agreement that exists between the Canberra Hospital and the Department of Health and Community Care. In that purchase agreement there is a requirement. I will quote from that agreement. It says that the current waiting list is to be reviewed to ensure compliance with the definitions. In other words, Mr Speaker, this has to be done as part of the purchase agreement. So there are no horrible undercurrents here; we have to do a review under the purchase agreement.

One of the focuses of this review was to examine compliance with the relevant national health data dictionary definitions, Mr Speaker. These change from time to time; so it is important to do audits every now and again to ensure that you are up to speed or that counting is occurring appropriately. The national health data dictionary waiting list

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