Page 3342 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 14 November 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The AMA has always supported the concept of local boards. And when they were dismantled in Western Australia—
her home state—
we fought quite hard to stop that from happening.
The dismantling was something instigated by the Government and Health Department at the time, under-resourcing the boards so that they could take control.
Local boards mean that the chair of that board can make direct representations to the Health Minister; make demands with regards funding, the opening of beds, and the needs of that board—of that hospital, and I guess that might be uncomfortable for State Governments and State Health Ministers.
Of course it is, and I am sure there have been offenders on our side of the political landscape. But the fact of the matter is that if you go through life taking a view that you do not want this level of accountability, that you do not want to hear the perspective of people in the front line and the community’s concerns and simply take a blinkered approach, then you can probably convince yourself that all is well. But the fact of the matter is that that is not a position that is sustainable. The level of public concern in this territory is continuing to grow. The horror stories that have been cited by members on this side of the house and raised with me directly by constituents about the administration of public health raise deep concerns and strengthen the need for a comprehensive inquiry along the lines that Mr Stefaniak is putting forward.
What is there to fear if things are run so well? What is there to fear? We hear Mr Corbell argue that it would be another layer of bureaucracy. Well, this government is a champion of layers of bureaucracy, an absolute champion. It has established a record for a very heavily weighted bureaucracy in health and that does not seem to trouble it.
When we have advocated reforms and efficiencies, as I did in my first budget response in 2004, I was attacked by Mr Stanhope for suggesting improvements in efficiency in health administration. Mr Stanhope made extreme statements about how I would shut down the health system and rip hundreds of millions out of the health system. That was the puerile response that was produced as a defence for the high level of inefficiency.
This government can take some guidance from what the Howard Government is proposing to do nationally. On 19 October, the federal Minister for Health, Mr Abbott, said:
The Howard Government wants to establish local hospital boards that will represent the views of the community and ensure that the health bureaucracy allows doctors to operate.
These community boards will put pressure on politicians and bureaucrats to cut the waiting lists and improve the quality of care.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .