Page 1277 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 23 March 2010

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video

The Assembly voted—

Ayes 5

Noes 10

Mr Doszpot

Mr Barr

Mr Hargreaves

Mrs Dunne

Ms Bresnan

Ms Hunter

Mr Hanson

Ms Burch

Ms Le Couteur

Mr Seselja

Mr Corbell

Ms Porter

Mr Smyth

Ms Gallagher

Mr Rattenbury

Question so resolved in the negative.

Ministerial arrangements

MS GALLAGHER (Molonglo—Deputy Chief Minister, Treasurer, Minister for Health and Minister for Industrial Relations): Due to the delay in question time today, the Chief Minister is unable to be here as he is attending a national meeting. So I am happy to take his questions or take them on notice.

Questions without notice

Government—election promises

MR SESELJA: My question is to the Minister for Health. Minister, I refer to your answer last week to a question from Mrs Dunne that you were considering purchasing Calvary hospital, with Little Company of Mary continuing to run the hospital. Did the government consider this proposal when it originally considered its options? If so, why was it not included as an option in the Treasury analysis? If not, why not?

MS GALLAGHER: No, it was not considered in the previous discussions that we had with Little Company of Mary. That was largely because it does not—well, it still remains the second preferred option on the way forward. The government’s intention from the beginning was to seek ownership and management of Calvary Public Hospital. It was around ownership, to allow us to invest the capital into the buildings in a way that our budget could afford. The operating arrangement was to deliver the networked system across both hospitals that we were after. Indeed, the management of the contract of staff and services across the two sites was something that many, many of the staff who work in Calvary supported.

We are unable to pursue that option and we accept that. We have moved to another proposal which currently operates in the Mersey hospital. We are seeking to get the Catholic Church’s support for that, which I am not certain will be forthcoming. As the last proposal is not able to proceed, the government believes that this is the next best preference on the way forward. If we can demonstrate that we have control over the asset then it will allow us to invest our capital funds in that asset.

MR SPEAKER: Supplementary question, Mr Seselja?

MR SESELJA: Given your answer, minister, why did you fail to seriously examine all of the options for Calvary hospital?

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video