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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 8 Hansard (28 August) . . Page.. 2639 ..

Mrs Carnell: I said "not on social issues". That is the quote.

MR BERRY: You cannot always separate social issues from economic issues, Mrs Carnell, because they impact on each other.

Mrs Carnell: There is no doubt that they do; but I have to say that they are not the same thing.

MR BERRY: One impacts on the other, in case you have not noticed.

So far as health is concerned, I note the five principles endorsed by Health Ministers. They relate to the health needs of individuals, particularly those who frequently use the system. On the face of it, they look pretty good. Funding will be focused on identified outputs and outcomes, and will support evidence-based best practice. There will be a focus on continuous improvement across the health system, encouraging best practice, innovative models of health care provision and transformational change in infrastructure - all warm-sounding words. There will be cost-effective management, for the benefit of consumers and governments, with improved management of risks by those in the best position to do so. Information will be collected across the health system, and so on. Mr Speaker, they seem pretty good on the surface. But what really impacts on the community is what Ministers, in their respective States and Territories, do to address the system. Mrs Carnell's answer is a secret deal with a major multinational company to build a private hospital and force more people into private health care. That is Mrs Carnell's answer to these sorts of things.

I heard Mrs Carnell talk about the national diabetes strategy. I trust and I hope that that will lead to a better deal for people living with diabetes. It is especially important for the Aboriginal community, who increasingly need specialised care in that area. I note that general practitioners in the ACT are developing a better strategy for dealing with diabetes than was once the case, and I welcome that. The Immunise Australia program is, as mentioned in Mrs Carnell's speech, a fundamental health program endorsed by Health Ministers - all good news - but still it appears that immunisation rates are in peril. The ACT has the highest rate in Australia, undoubtedly, and there are many good reasons for that. The principal one is that this is a compact city-state - or city-territory, to properly describe it. It is, nevertheless, a difficulty if the same immunisation rates are not being achieved in surrounding areas because of their location and so on.

Mr Speaker, I suppose that the high-profile issue that emerged during the course of the council meeting in Cairns was the heroin trial. Time will tell how the rest of the decisions taken in relation to illicit drugs will work, but I certainly support those moves. They are moves that might not have been taken a couple of years ago; but it is good to see that there have been improvements in the area of trials and experiments on new therapies. The point that I raise again in respect of the ACT is the apparent fixation that we have had with the heroin trial in the Territory. It is true that the ACT spends quite a lot of its funds on drug rehabilitation programs. There are national education programs and so on. It is also true that the ACT has a very special problem. It has had almost three years of heroin trial debate, advertising the Government's acquiescence, if you like, in the legal prescription of injecting drugs. Mr Speaker, it has reached a pinnacle during the course of this Chief Minister's reign.

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