Page 4726 - Week 13 - Tuesday, 10 November 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MS GALLAGHER: Mr Hanson is unable to grasp the analysis as it stands, and that is unfortunate.
MR SPEAKER: Ms Porter, a supplementary question?
MS PORTER: Minister, in relation to the proposed purchase of Calvary, can you please outline some of the benefits, including the financial benefits of a networked public hospital system?
MS GALLAGHER: I would be very happy to do so. In relation to the financial analysis, I have to say even though we have had criticism on the sidelines from a number of players, they have been unable to prove that the Treasury analysis is wrong. That is the challenge. That is the challenge to those that oppose this deal.
Mr Hanson: On a point of order: the question was specifically about the financial benefits of a networked public hospital system, rather than the Treasury analysis about the purchase of Calvary hospital. I think there is a significant distinction between the financial benefits of actually having the two hospitals operating together and the financial benefits of that. They are very separate issues, Mr Speaker.
MR SPEAKER: Treasurer.
MS GALLAGHER: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I was just getting to the point that the financial analysis clearly shows that, under the proposal to buy the hospital, of all the options, it is the most cost-effective way to manage the rebuild of the Calvary Public Hospital at Bruce, and nobody has been able to dispute that. So the financial analysis clearly shows that, over a 20-year period, our balance sheet, our operating result, will be better off in the order of $145 million.
In relation to the networked hospital, that is something that I think the opposition are using as a reason not to support the move. They have failed to understand the possibilities or the opportunities that are generated from a networked public hospital system.
For example, if one were to attend the emergency department at Calvary and required transfer to the Canberra hospital, at the moment both emergency departments are managed under different governance and management arrangements. The IT systems do not speak to each other. The public hospital at Bruce is managed by paper. We have an electronic system at TCH. For that patient to be transferred to TCH requires a significant amount of work between the management structures of both hospitals to allow that to happen. It happens as well for transfers from Canberra hospital to Calvary hospital.
MR SPEAKER: Mr Coe, a supplementary question?
MR COE: Minister, are Professor Davidson and Dr Dwyer wrong?
MS GALLAGHER: Their analysis is incomplete. It does not look at the impact on our budget. It does not look at the impact on our balance sheet. In relation to
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video