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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 14 Hansard (11 December) . . Page.. 4964 ..

MR BERRY (continuing):

Those barbs which are contained in the Government response do not enhance the standing of the Chief Minister or the Government. They are merely distractions from the main issue. The main issue is that this hospital will provide some jobs in its construction stage. The cost of the hospital will have to be retrieved from business in the ACT. That will come from other hospitals. The jobs that are created within the new hospital will come from other hospitals. In fact, they may indeed create shortages in skilled staff which may affect our public hospital.

The other matter which struck me during the inquiry was the seemingly absolute commitment by officers from the Territory's health area to a joint and shared facility with the new private hospital for the provision of cardiac bypass surgery and those sorts of things. We were most surprised that this agreement had not been stitched up. When the private sector person came before us, he said, "Oh, no, I am not going to have a bar of that. We are going to be totally independent. We are not going to have anything to do with the public sector. It is not going to be shared at all". We have all heard for aeons how it takes about 300 people to make a satisfactory unit in a public system. We know that for ages there has been some question about whether that number could be achieved here in the ACT. The private hospital says, "We are going to do about 150". That is what they think anyway. That leaves about 150. What does that do to our public system? That is the question that is still nagging at me. Does it make it too inefficient to operate in the public context? Does it mean that we are going to contract at $10,000 a throw to the private hospital to get it done? What does it mean? I do not think you know. It means that we are going to contract for the private hospital, does it not? That is what it sounds like to me. It will cost buckets. If it does not, the efficiency of our own unit will be affected. I would like to hear some more in relation to that.

Mr Speaker, this has been a sad and sorry enterprise embarked upon by the Government. It has angered businessmen in the ACT and created a great deal of suspicion about the Government's motives. It seems that the Government was playing favourites in relation to the matter and making sure that they discriminated against local businesses. I find that most surprising from a Liberal Government here in the ACT. This hospital will provide quality services, I am sure. But, as I said, it will not come cheaply. It will be expensive for everybody who uses it. It will force up health care costs in the ACT.

MR TEMPORARY DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Hird): Order! The member's time has expired.

MS TUCKER (4.36): I spoke to a lot of these arguments when we tabled the report, but I feel I need to respond again now, because I think I have been caught in the middle a bit here. I did not have a fixed view at the beginning of this inquiry. I have already said that. I was not prepared to support it unless a number of my concerns were acknowledged by Mr Berry, and he did acknowledge them. I think we had a quick inquiry in a very political environment. It was different to any other committee inquiry I have been involved in here. I think that the recommendations are reasonable. The tendering process, obviously, is not a consultation process. What I am concerned about is that no real needs assessment was done beforehand. I think that should have been done. That is why John James and Calvary are justifiably concerned about the process that occurred.

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