Page 553 - Week 02 - Thursday, 9 March 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
In particular, he claims that the New South Wales government pays too much to the ACT government to provide health services to New South Wales residents. I would have thought that the New South Wales health minister had better things to do and more things to worry about than think about what goes on here in the ACT.
There has been, unfortunately, real neglect from the New South Wales government when it comes to providing adequate health services in the surrounding region. It has been too easy for the New South Wales government to rely on the ACT for its healthcare services. We have, I must say, seen some encouraging signs of a turnaround in this attitude in the last year or so, in particular through decisions of the New South Wales government to upgrade Queanbeyan Hospital and to work with ACT Health in reversing flows of patients into the ACT health system.
I would be quite happy as Minister for Health—and I am sure my colleagues would join with me—in saying that we would be quite happy to get a lower payment from New South Wales if it meant fewer New South Wales patients coming to our hospitals because that would relieve pressure on our own health system and allow us to manage the demands we face here in the ACT without those additional pressures from New South Wales.
It is very unfair of the New South Wales minister to say that he pays too much. In fact, it ignores the facts. The facts are that the arrangement that is in place to pay the ACT is an arbitrated outcome. We have to accept the independent umpire’s decision on the appropriate level of compensation that is paid for the treatment of New South Wales patients in ACT hospitals and, vice versa, for the treatment of ACT patients in New South Wales hospitals.
I would have thought that Mr Hatzistergos could be focusing more on the fact that he has patients, with drips in their arm, sitting in cars outside emergency departments, rather than contemplating a takeover of the ACT health system. The important thing is to focus on improving patient flows and reversing patient flows back into New South Wales wherever possible.
That is not to say that the ACT does not have a role in servicing the region. We do. It is a very important one. It is an important one because it means that our community has access to a range of health services that would not otherwise be viable if we were simply relying on our own population rather than the population of the surrounding region to support them. Whether that is in neurosurgery, new-born intensive care or a range of other areas, both the region and the ACT get benefits from a sharing of the population that is able to be serviced by these services.
It is important that, wherever possible, patient flows are reversed. Whether that means more orthopaedic surgery being undertaken in the region, more dialysis being undertaken in the region or a range of other services being undertaken in the region, that has two benefits. It has benefits to New South Wales residents in getting services closer to where they live. It has benefits to the ACT in reducing the pressure on the ACT health system.
When you consider that a third of the elective surgery waiting list patients are New South Wales patients, that is an obvious area for improvement. That is where the New South
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .