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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 06 Hansard (Wednesday, 23 June 2004) . . Page.. 2517 ..

Again, we are going to be at the hands of the experimenters. Why shouldn’t we do it? I know what is going on here. “We want to be the first.” Yes, I forgot. Because it is a greenfields site, let’s go down this track of being “the first”. Why not? Something else. Well, Mr Stanhope will have so many medals he will be walking lopsided, I think, if he gets elected at the next election.

Let’s just have a look at some of the services currently provided through our local pharmacies. I really am very concerned that they are being taken down this journey of uncertainty by an arrogant government with an arrogant attitude that will just railroad its agenda through no matter what. I really wonder what the agenda is. It certainly is not to provide a better service; it certainly is not to provide competition, or fair competition, or a level playing field.

Have a look at the services provided. There is the methadone program. Are you going to rock up at the supermarket and get your methadone? What are we going to do to people?

Mrs Cross: Put it in the basket with your tomatoes and cucumbers.

MRS BURKE: That’s it. Trolley them along. Yes, that is right. We should not make light of it, Mrs Cross.

There is the home medicine review, an extremely important part played by our pharmacies in conjunction with GPs. The patient can walk into the pharmacy at the moment and have a specialised person on site to get their medications checked. There are the talks to the community—endless hours, unpaid hours—to the ACT carers, to those from a non-English speaking background, to the war veterans, to diabetes groups. I could go on and on.

Do you think, when we have this new push, this new wave and something new, that this service is going to come free? No, these come at a tangible cost to the pharmacist. So who is going to pay? I see it as being user-pays. I thought that was something that this government, which stands on a strong social platform, would be totally dead against. Well, I am being proved wrong.

Let’s have a look at another thing, the Gallop report. Interestingly enough, at page 165 it deals with medication. I understand that for over 18 months the pharmacy-combined effort—and they still have a full-time person working on that project right now—worked towards the introduction of the Webster packs, the booster packs, which is a major advance towards the prevention of medication mishaps which, we all know is a serious issue. Eighteen months of input free, gratis. So we remove that. Who is going to pay for somebody’s wages for 18 months? That is an enormous cost to the community. Again, stunned by the silence opposite—no interjections. It is quite good having no interjections. They are obviously all hiding away embarrassed somewhere.

Mrs Cross: It’s their commitment to the community, Jacqui.

MRS BURKE: Yes. Here comes the health minister. Welcome. Quality of care will suffer. Let’s talk about professional accountability. Duty of care is now a major issue. But let’s have a look. Currently the pharmacist and the owner are held accountable. We

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