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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 1 Hansard (17 February) . . Page.. 203 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

Let us look into the future, because that is a critical thing. The new acting chief executive officer, Ted Rayment, is a man who has my confidence. He has not come from outside the hospital system, as has been the case with many of the other CEOs. He has a good knowledge of the hospital's workings and an enormous desire to have the hospital operate to the very best of its ability within the budget framework. But there are some long-term issues that he has to deal with and, what is more important, he has the strong support of management and is building up a very good relationship with the unions and in other areas. That is something that I have encouraged. In fact, directly after he was appointed CEO, I sat down with Mr Rayment and the Nursing Federation and personally encouraged Mr Rayment. In that meeting with the Nursing Federation I said, "We want to see a change in relations to make sure that there is a much more positive relationship between the hospital management and the Nursing Federation".

I am quite sure that Mr Rayment will be able to make significant progress over the next six months. We could, there is no doubt, bring the hospital budget into line within six months. But could we do it and maintain the level of service that we currently deliver? That probably cannot happen. So, Mr Speaker, we will be doing our best to make sure that we maintain the level of service, because our first priority is to look after our patients right across the health system, while at the same time trying to make sure that we have made the appropriate structural changes to ensure that the budget management of the hospital is conducted appropriately.

I would like to go now to the issue that Mr Stanhope has raised in terms of my management role as a Minister. Mr Speaker, I am in a "damned if I do and damned if I don't situation". There is no question about this: Short-term political expedience will always lead to people saying, "The Minister interfered too much" or, "The Minister just sat back and did nothing". Either way I am damned. Mr Stanhope, in his motion, says to me and the Assembly, "Minister, you must fix the problem. You must take responsibility for it". Yes. Then he says, "But you must not meddle". I do not think you can have both. If I sit back and do nothing, I am accused. If I try to get involved and do something, I am accused. That makes for easy short-term political mileage, but it is seen through.

Over the last several months - in fact, from the time I first became Minister - I demanded results of the hospital through Mr Johnston, but management as a team were not breaking through the various forms of resistance. Mr Speaker, I have a long set of letters that I wrote to Mr Johnston demanding particular sets of changes. In recent weeks I have made even sterner demands. I have joined with Mr Rayment to put, in effect, to the whole senior management team, corporate managers and clinical leaders, that they must perform as individuals and as a team in changing the hospital and the way it is run. I have interfered, Mr Speaker. I am proud of it. It is my job and the public expect me to do so. If I did not take personal involvement, Mr Stanhope would put out a press release to the effect that the hospital burns while Mr Moore fiddles. That is simply a juvenile style of commentary. We know about the press release style of politics that Mr Stanhope has taken on in the last couple of months.

Mr Speaker, I will continue to take action in a couple of ways in terms of interfering with hospital management. The first is that I will approve any new jobs personally and I will do so until such time as the Canberra Hospital team has put together its strategic plan.

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