Page 4412 - Week 10 - Thursday, 23 September 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
a debate on the number of GPs we have in this town. The accurate figures are that, whilst the number of GPs in the rest of the nation has been growing at a level of eight per cent over a period since 1991, GP numbers in this town have declined. That is on the public record if he wants to have a debate about that. If he wants to have a debate about our emergency departments, I would gladly discuss them. Perhaps we could have a broader debate about the truthfulness of his government on issues like school closures and whether they were outlined before the last election—
MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER: Excuse me, Mr Hanson, you are supposed to be speaking to Ms Bresnan’s amendment, and I have not heard reference to it yet.
MR HANSON: Indeed, but Mr Hargreaves made points about truthfulness in debate. You allowed him to proceed with that debate on truthfulness in debate. Returning to the amendment from Ms Bresnan, she is supporting my motion, but she has asked for two items to be removed. Let me just read what they are. The first is:
… that the ACT Government abandoned its proposal to purchase Calvary Public Hospital in February 2010 after 18 months of negotiations with the Little Company of Mary …
I am not sure in any way that that is inaccurate. That is actually a statement of fact, and it is a statement of fact that the minister outlined in her tabling statement in June and I think in the meeting previously. I am not sure why that needs to be removed.
The second is:
… that the process followed by the Minister for Health was flawed and caused significant aggravation to the community …
Both of those are correct statements. It has been flawed; it has been a failed process. If it was a successful process, we would have bought the hospital by now. It has been flawed process, and it has caused significant aggravation to the community. I would challenge the Greens who want to remove this to go and speak to the Palliative Care Society, the Health Care Consumers Association, the Australian Nursing Federation and the staff at Calvary hospital and ask if this caused them aggravation. They will tell you, “Yes, it did.” I am not sure why we are removing those words, but I do understand that the Greens would not want criticism of their coalition partners.
I can well imagine the frantic phone calls that occurred between the minister and the convenor of the Greens on this one. I note that the Greens will be supportive, and I can just imagine those phone lines running hot—Katy ringing Meredith: “Are you going to support it? Don’t support it. Don’t support it.”
I welcome the amendment, even though it will remove some important parts of the motion. I welcome that it indicates that the Greens will be supporting the motion in its entirety. Once we have had the vote on Ms Bresnan’s amendment, I will seek leave to introduce my own amendment relating to my failure to trust Ms Gallagher not to actually gazump the committee. If you listened to her speech, she said that she will be following through with her process and she will not be stopped by whatever the committee tables or whatever its processes are and whatever its time lines are.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video