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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 11 Hansard (21 October) . . Page.. 3844 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

Of course, it is interesting to contrast this with the approach of the Liberal Party. The acting shadow minister in her comments yesterday suggested that the best way to fix this problem was to close the waiting list. In fact, in her media statement issued yesterday she said that there was no point admitting more people for surgery when those already on the list could not be catered for. What a callous and penny-pinching move that would be. What she is saying is that regardless of their medical urgency, regardless of the urgency for treatment, you are not allowed on the waiting list until everyone else on the waiting list has been dealt with. Not only is that callous, it also highlights a completely-

Mr Cornwell: A point of order, Mr Speaker. I don't recall that Ms MacDonald's question asked for the views of the opposition on this matter. The answer has been very long-winded, sir. But, as I recall, it simply asked for figures in relation to the hospitals.

MR SPEAKER: Yes, confine yourself to the subject matter of the question, Minister.

MR CORBELL: On the point of order, Mr Speaker, the question was: can I inform the Assembly about the status of access to elective surgery in the territory's public hospitals? It did not ask for specific figures. Mr Speaker, I think the answer is consistent but I will certainly abide by your ruling.

Mr Speaker, the reality is that the Liberal Party, in response to the most recent figures announced yesterday, suggested closing the waiting list as a way to fix the problem. So it does not matter whether you are category 1 or category 2 or category 3; you are not allowed on the waiting list.

Mr Stefaniak: A point of order, Mr Speaker.

MR SPEAKER: Order! Resume your seat for a moment, Mr Stefaniak. Minister, would you please confine yourself to the subject matter of the question. Mr Stefaniak, what is your point of order?

Mr Stefaniak: That was my point of order, Mr Speaker-118 (a).

MR CORBELL: Mr Speaker, access to the territory's public hospitals is about making sure that people are treated in priority of their medical need. What is being suggested by those opposite is not endorsed by the government. It is not endorsed by the government because we know that it is naive to suggest that people who are category 1 should not be allowed onto the waiting list. But that is exactly the suggestion being made by those opposite. The suggestion being made by those opposite is naive and is not consistent with the government's approach.

Mr Speaker, in addition, it is worth highlighting the contradictory approach that we have seen from the Liberal Party.

Mr Stefaniak: On a point of order, Mr Speaker. He is still breaching 118 (a).

MR SPEAKER: Mr Corbell, I refer you to standing order 118 (a) and ask you to confine yourself to the subject matter of the question or resume your seat.

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