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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 5 Hansard (15 May) . . Page.. 1463 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

I accept Mr Berry's view; I accept that he has a very strongly held view about that sort of thing. That is fine. But, if he has that strong view, how likely is it that we are going to get a balanced report out of this committee? We know what we are going to hear from this committee. It is going to be all about how nasty private hospital beds in the ACT are, how there must be some secret Government plan to produce a wind-down of the public hospital system to force people into the private hospital system. It is going to be all about taking resources off the public hospital system for the benefit of the rich. That is what we are going to hear. I would be very happy to be proved wrong, but I have seen this so many times before. Mr Berry has made these comments time and time again in this place. If he has this hatred of things private, particularly in health, that is fair enough; but ought he to be, as I suspect he will be, chairing a committee inquiring into this area? I have grave doubts about it. To be quite frank, what is the point of having a committee the result of which is a foregone conclusion right now?

You are doing a job on the private hospital that Mrs Carnell indicated a year ago she was going to implement. Now we get complaints about the fact that a contract was signed when Mr Berry's motion was imminent. His motion should have come on a year ago if he had been serious about holding up the process while he explored private hospital need in the ACT. The question has to be asked: Why has he waited for a year after the Government announced its intentions to move for this inquiry?

Mrs Carnell: Because it is a political stunt.

MR HUMPHRIES: The answer, as Mrs Carnell has just indicated, is very clear. It is a political stunt. Sitting on that table in front of him Mr Berry probably has the recommendations of the committee written out already. If he has not, I can tell you what they will be. I can dictate them to you right now. What is the point in having three people sidelined for two or three months - or whatever it is - to come out with Mr Berry's views on these matters and have them put before the Assembly and have a debate about what we all know already is the view of Mr Berry on these matters? I think it is unnecessary to have that waste of time occur. I acknowledge that the support is there for this motion. It is going to happen. But I simply say to the Assembly: In the circumstances, given the amount of work on the plate of the Assembly already and the foregone conclusion we know that this exercise will be, is there really any point in doing this?

MRS CARNELL (Chief Minister and Minister for Health and Community Care) (11.24): Mr Speaker, I seek leave to move two amendments together.

Leave granted.

MRS CARNELL: I move:

(1) Paragraph (2), omit the paragraph.

(2) Paragraph (4), omit the words "if the Assembly is not sitting when the Committee", substitute the words "the Committee shall report by 31 August 1997 and if the Assembly is not sitting when the Committee".

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