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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 8 Hansard (25 August) . . Page.. 2436 ..

MR STANHOPE (continuing):

terminally ill can bring to bear. That is the situation we have at the moment. We have this pre-eminent facility in a pre-eminent site, staffed and managed by staff and an organisation without peer in Australia.

It is vitally important that we maintain that level of excellence and expertise. The challenge facing this Assembly and this community is to ensure that the delivery of care to the terminally ill is not downgraded one iota. That is the challenge for each of us; it is the challenge for this Assembly; it is the challenge for this Government. There must not be a backward step of any order in the nature of the care that we provide to the terminally ill in this community. If there is one service which we as a community can provide, it is a service to those who are dying, those who are facing their mortality, more often than not those with cancer, who know that their remaining time is short or limited. Some know with precision, sometimes almost to the week or the day, how long they have to live. Their time is short and there is work to be done.

That is the situation we face. That is what we must replicate. That is the challenge facing us. We ask the question now: Have we engaged in a process here that allows us to face that challenge with any certitude? I do not think we have, the Hospice and Palliative Care Society do not think we have and I do not believe those professionals who work at the ACT Hospice believe we have.

I think the fact that the Minister has now agreed to the assessment of two additional centrally located sites is an indication that the process has not been as good as it should have been; that there has been an element of adhockery about it; that there has not been appropriate consultation with the primary consumer advocates, namely the Hospice and Palliative Care Society; that there is significant concern within the hospice and palliative care community that we are not going to deliver the very best facility that we can provide for terminally people within this community. Taking a backward step is a course we simply cannot contemplate.

While there are many people in the community - and I have constant representations to me on this point - who believe that a lake view is a very significant aspect of the success of the hospice, I think it is something which we as a community must take seriously. We must look seriously at the capacity we have to provide a location for our replacement hospice which replicates all the best features of our existing hospice.

We have a hospice on perhaps one of the most wonderful sites in the ACT, Acton Peninsula. We must do all we can to replicate that. It is a pity that we are leaving Acton Peninsula. Those in the Labor Party think that we should never have been forced into the position we have been. I will not go into that in detail. Rosemary Follett, as Chief Minister and as the person who negotiated initially with the Commonwealth about the land swap, was adamant about one thing in relation to the land swap. Rosemary Follett and a Labor government would not have swapped the hospice or its site. The paper trail is clear on that. Rosemary Follett was adamant that she would not swap the hospice or its site as part of a deal to exchange Acton Peninsula for Kingston. It was simply non-negotiable under a Labor government. That is one of the situations we need to take into account.

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