Page 574 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 24 February 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
If the government believes that it is in a position where it can reach an agreement with LCM that does not compromise the government’s financial investments, we support those negotiations. I note, however, that the ACT government may still have ongoing difficulties with LCM with regard to the delivery of public health services and I urge the government not to completely discount options such as compulsory acquisition if an agreement cannot be achieved in the next round of negotiations.
I think we do need to acknowledge that in this situation we are dealing with powerful individuals and organisations that may hinder the ACT government’s advancements towards public hospital expansion. Take, for instance, back in 2004, when there were struggles between the then Minister for Health, Mr Corbell, and LCM. I would like to reflect on statements made by the chair of LCM in a letter to the Canberra Times printed on 23 November 2009:
… I met with Ms Bresnan MLA on Friday last week …
I advised Ms Bresnan that Little Company of Mary Health Care would respect and work with whatever decision is made by the ACT community expressed through the elected members of the Legislative Assembly.
I assume that the meaning of this statement is that, if the Assembly had voted on my motion to decouple the sales of Calvary hospital and Clare Holland House, LCM would have respected that vote and gone ahead with hospital discussions without including Clare Holland House. The LCM chair never made any such statements in his meeting with me or said anything that even alluded to such a statement. I do not seek to denigrate the LCM sisters by raising any of the concerns or issues I have today or at any other stage during this debate. The nature of their order is quite distinct from the board of LCM. I do wish to share these concerns with my fellow MLAs to encourage acknowledgement of the difficulty we, as members representing the ACT community, and the government, face in representing and protecting our constituents and seeking improved health services for them.
The government appears to have a very difficult case on hand when it comes to negotiating an outcome on the Calvary site with LCM. Given the situation the ACT government is in and given that the current and past attempts to purchase Calvary hospital have been unsuccessful, the ACT government should seriously be considering a range of options in this case.
The Greens will be supporting Ms Porter’s motion today and I would urge both LCM and the government to consider a range of options. To not do so in the current situation would seem to be the wrong path to take.
I will finally add that I do not resile at all from the stance that the Greens took on this issue. There were significant concerns with the proposal as it stood and it was incumbent on us to respond to those concerns. It was not a small number of people or a narrow representation of groups expressing those concerns. I do not think anyone in this place or any of the other parties involved took any satisfaction from the way the recent situation unfolded.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video