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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 2 Hansard (29 February) . . Page.. 364 ..

MS TUCKER: My question is to Mr Moore as Minister for Health. Mr Moore, in the State of the Territory Report, on page 35, there is a summary of public dental service waiting times. Next to it is a down arrow and the words "improvement needed". The report explains that in July 1998 the waiting period for dentures was 78 weeks, compared with the pre-denture scheme peak of 126 weeks in July 1997 following the withdrawal of Federal funding, and claims that the waiting periods are now the lowest since April 1994. We are hearing that there is 11/2-year wait for dentures but that there is an improvement there. Then it says that between 1997 and 1998 the waiting period for the restorative scheme increased from 67 weeks to 110 weeks. If you look at the graph in the report and go back another year to 1996, you see that the waiting time for the restorative scheme increased from what looks like about 10 weeks to 110 weeks, so there is an issue of selective information in this State of the Territory Report. But we know there is a two-year wait for restorative work. After seeing that and obviously being concerned about it, as anyone would be, I was interested to see a glossy publication from ACT Community Care on the dental health program. It says in the boldest print, "You told us we were doing our jobs well", and there is a little testimonial from a person about the children's dental program. Then you turn the page and in smaller print it says, "And there were some areas where we could improve" and it mentions a complaint from one person about the waiting time. There is then a table which tells us the five general aspects of service the community rated as most important in the dental health program, and there are quite good performance ratings there. But there is no reference to waiting times in that table. My question to you, Minister, is: Could you give us information about how this survey is carried out, who is asked, how many, why you do not say what the proportion of satisfaction versus concern is, what the questions were that meant that you did not ask people the relevance of waiting times and how you reconcile the main statement in this pamphlet - "You told us we were doing our jobs well" - with waiting periods of over two years for restorative work and 11/2 years for dentures?

MR MOORE: Ms Tucker's comment about selective reporting is interesting. It was very generous of Ms Tucker at the beginning of question time to come over and hand me a piece of paper and say, "I am going to ask you a question about the dental health program". But she was selective in what she presented to me. What she did not present to me at the same time was page 35 of the State of the Territory Report, with the graph that she refers to. That is what the nub of the question was about. Fortunately my staff, realising there was going to be a question - and thank you for letting me know - did provide me with that page. It just shows how anybody can play with selective use of data. There is an irony in Ms Tucker asking me about the dental health program and being selective.

In the State of the Territory Report we made it very clear that we were dissatisfied and that improvement was needed. To suggest that we were somehow secretive about that information is just nonsense. The information is there, with a very clear graph, which is no doubt what caught your eye. We put the picture there so you would know that we have a problem with the waiting periods. It is there in front of you to see from that graph.

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