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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 10 Hansard (23 September) . . Page.. 3502 ..

MR SMYTH (continuing):

common denominator and I do not want a health system in the ACT that is based on the lowest common denominator.

Surely our health system should be based on excellence and the ability to attract excellent physicians to work in our hospital system.

Mr Corbell: Are you saying we don't?

MR SMYTH: As we currently have. Surely we should be going after people with excellent qualifications, with long experience, with leadership and innovation, rather than saying, "This is the health system that Minister Corbell presides over. It's the lowest common denominator health system."I do not think that anybody in Canberra wants a lowest common denominator health system. What I think people want is a system that encourages people to come here-doctors of innovation, leaders in their field, people who want to innovate in the health field to get better outcomes for patients. It sounds like this legislation will result in a better outcome for the department. It is a bottom line health amendment bill rather than a better health outcomes for ordinary Canberrans health amendment bill.

Mr Speaker, we do need to give the VMOs the protection that part of this bill gives but what we do not need to do is give the minister the whip hand, which is well and truly hidden, I suspect. There is no talk in the tabling speech of the powers that the minister will get. It talks about making sure the VMOs are protected in their bargaining practices. So under the guise of something good, I think we have got something that will take away from the ACT health system and will limit our ability to attract VMOs. We already know that, like every other jurisdiction, our ability to attract good medical officers is limited by the number of medical officers out there.

We ought to be creating a climate that is conducive to more, better and the most excellent of health professions coming here, not a bill that gives the minister the power to work to a bottom line. The lowest common denominator is not what the Liberal Party wants in the health system. What we want is innovation and excellence so that Canberrans know that should they need to use their hospital they are going to get the best of treatment on every occasion.

MR SPEAKER: I understand it is the wish of the Assembly to break for lunch at 12.30, so I will interrupt the debate at 12.30.

MS TUCKER (12:18): According to the presentation speech, the key rationale for the proposed return to a collective negotiation process is to progressively eliminate the inequities within and between medical specialists groups that have arisen in recent years, and to establish more consistent performance requirements for each group. Later in the speech it is explained that the policy on remuneration will address such matters as transparent, consistent and competitive rates of remuneration that will ensure that the territory is in a position to engage and retain the services of medical specialists now and in the future, productivity and performance requirements and value for money for the ACT community. That all sounds good and worthy of support.

My comments on this come from a different angle to those put forward by Mr Smyth. I am a little intrigued and interested to see what are in some ways greater protections being

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