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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 14 Hansard (9 December) . . Page.. 4715 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

Because there is an urgency about it, I am comfortable about supporting the Bill as put by Mrs Carnell. On the other hand, I must say that I think it is untimely to support the amendments to be put by Ms Tucker. I will not be supporting them at this stage. I think it is appropriate for us to consider this full range of issues as to exactly who should be on such boards, rather than adding a series of options of people along the lines that Ms Tucker is suggesting.

There is the exception where the Government is likely to move a legal representative onto the board to ensure that the sorts of processes that are followed will not be easily able to be challenged in the courts. Secondly, natural justice should apply in the way that it does there. I do not disagree with the sentiment that Ms Tucker has put. It is really just a question of timing. I think the sentiment of ensuring that such boards do make sure that consumers are affected is appropriate, but I would also want to make sure that people who understand health as a broad issue would also be represented on the board, rather than those who see health as just the absence of sickness. In my mind, there is still a series of issues that are not resolved by the amendments to be put by Ms Tucker. I shall be voting against them at this time.

MS TUCKER (11.58): The Greens will be supporting these pieces of legislation. We also had a briefing from the Government, which we appreciated, and can see the reasons why a legal representative is being included on the health professions registration boards. The Government is also adding a community representative to the Medical Board, although we note that the legislation did not specify that the person will have to be a community health representative. I am moving the amendment to add a health consumer representative as well because I believe it is high time we acknowledged that the broader perspective on health is necessary on these boards and, particularly, to have a health consumer perspective. I understand Mr Moore's position on that, although I am a bit surprised by it.

For many years, consumers were excluded from decision-making at all levels of health care. Consumers do not have a say in relation to resource allocation and overall health priority setting on the ACT Health and Community Care Board; nor do consumers have formal input into priority setting for the health services in their own communities. The ACT Greens want to ensure that consumers have well-informed decision-making powers in all parts of the health system. We hear rhetoric now about placing health consumers in a central position in the health care system but not so many concrete measures to achieve it. One very important piece of legislation which, hopefully, will tilt the balance back in favour of health consumers will be debated later this week.

I believe we also have to get health consumers onto the medical boards. The Medical Board has a number of roles - registration, discipline and setting of standards. According to the briefing we had, the board hopes to become more involved in the setting of standards for the medical profession in the ACT, and that is why I think it is really important that there is a health consumer perspective in this process. Anyone - and that is probably just about all of us - knows that health services are too often focused on the convenience of the health practitioners and not the people receiving the service. I hope the amendments I will be moving will be supported, because I think they will improve this process.

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