Page 570 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 24 February 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
That is the point to remember: that the hospital will remain a hospital providing public health services to the ACT. Terry Dwyer’s assessment of the government’s Treasury analysis is that:
… the Treasury analysis shows that, far from saving money, the proposed Government takeover of Calvary Hospital means the people of the ACT are to be made to pay extra tax to the tune of $160 million extra in cold hard cash …
Tony Harris, in his advice provided to the minister, advice that would never have come to light if we had not asked for it, has described Katy Gallagher’s accounting arguments—
Ms Gallagher: It was not advice to the minister; it was advice to the archbishop.
MR HANSON: It was advice that was provided to you by the archbishop—
Ms Gallagher: But it was not my advice.
MR HANSON: It was advice that was provided to the minister. Anyway, it is specifically—
Mrs Dunne: You did not pay for it and you did not like it so it was inconvenient.
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Mr Hargreaves): Order, members! Mr Hanson has so far been heard in silence. I would like it to continue that way, please. Everybody will have an opportunity to debate.
MR HANSON: His description is that aspects of the argument are, as he describes it, a contrivance. We all know what Katy Gallagher said about Tony Harris and how everybody should listen to him, particularly those on the estimates committee. I will not go into that in detail; unfortunately I do not have time.
Tony Harris also makes the point that the budgetary effect of owning Calvary would be in essence eliminated by the need to spend $77 million and the flow-on reduction in the government’s cash position. Mr Harris has offered some suggestions for a way forward; they are worth looking at in detail. Others have made suggestions also.
I think that a better service agreement and funding agreement with the Little Company of Mary can be achieved. I think there are ways that it could be negotiated so that we could get a better outcome that would see government investment in Calvary but not necessarily mean that our balance sheet is affected. Tony Harris has outlined those options, as I have said. But that should not be allowed to dictate the level of investment in Calvary Hospital. It should be driven by the need for health outcomes, not bookkeeping arguments.
Ms Gallagher has admitted that she will have to negotiate a new funding arrangement with the owners of Calvary Public Hospital now that the deal to buy it has collapsed. She is quoted in the media as saying that she will work with the Little Company of
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video