Page 3616 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 21 November 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
the mark and which this minister repeatedly refuses to acknowledge are in fact behind the eight ball.
It is happening on her shift. The Chief Minister has been advising Mr Stefaniak about the composition of the ministry after October 2008. I have every confidence that the same person will not be in the role of Minister for Health after October 2008. Health has turned into a bit of a disaster zone for this government. Research conducted in the community shows that Canberrans are more distressed by the administration of health than by any other area of government policy. I know that the Labor Party has done research as well, and it is telling them the same thing. This is a disaster zone for this territory’s government.
The management of public health, the management of hospitals, the elective surgery waiting list, the state of the emergency department—these are areas where the people of Canberra are making it very clear that the minister is not doing the job properly. Mr Stanhope ought to listen to that community and shovel the job somewhere else. I do not know where you would go because we have had a few others who have had an attempt there and they have not proven up to the mark. But maybe Mr Gentleman or Ms MacDonald is ready to be moved into the front row and they might have a go. Everybody else seems to have made a fair hash of the role of Minister for Health.
In any event, clause 6 of Mrs Burke’s bill sets out the functions of the board. These functions are: to oversee the application of the health budget in relation to public hospitals in the ACT; to advise and make recommendations to the minister—you will still have to make some decisions, minister—on matters relating to public hospitals; to review public hospital services; and to enquire into and report to the minister on matters referred by the minister. The minister, of course, can also delegate other functions to the board.
I know that, for politicians, hospital boards do not always mean an easy ride. I have seen these messes in other jurisdictions. Having as the chair of the board an unpaid employee may result in independence of thinking, but the fact of the matter is that sometimes you leave that. If things are not performing adequately, then it is appropriate to have as chair of that board an eminent person in our community. These are the issues, minister, and they should be addressed.
You are not going to get that same level of candour when you have got people whose entire career and employment are dependent on ensuring that they stay in favour with ministers. In fact, that is the whole virtue of having a board of people who can be somewhat at arm’s length and give advice based on their expertise, on their relationship with the community and on their understanding of the issues. It has worked in the Little Company of Mary where they have a very, very strong board that is not afraid of making tough decisions. They deal with all the issues that are raised with them out of their hospital system. There is certainly a clear message here coming from the Australian government that I think the territory minister needs to take on board.
There are serious problems in ACT public hospitals. We would not be taking up the time of the Assembly if there was nothing here to complain about. We would not be
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .