Page 153 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 15 February 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
On the amendment proposed by Ms Gallagher, we will support it. I will be making some amendments to it, however. I seek leave to move the amendments circulated in my name.
Leave granted.
MS BRESNAN: I move:
(1) Omit subparagraph (1)(g).
(2) Insert new subparagraph (2)(aa):
“(aa) clarify the status of the TCH walk-in centre;”.
Ms Gallagher has talked about the funding and how that has been made clear. I do agree with Mr Hanson on point (h): that is not clear. With my amendments I propose to delete that.
In the second amendment that I have proposed, I have added that we need to clarify the future of the walk-in centre at TCH. I do appreciate what Ms Gallagher said in her speech on that—that there is still some uncertainty around that. I recognise that, but I think it is worth clarifying for the community what the future of that will be. I understand that there are a number of factors which come into play with that—that is, whether or not we have stand-alone clinics established in the community if the Canberra Hospital one is relocated to Phillip. I know there are a number of factors there, but I think it is worth noting in the motion that that should be clarified.
And I note that it is inserting this point; it is not taking out the other point about explaining how the funding for the walk-in centres will be funded beyond when the commonwealth funding finishes. I think it is important to clarify that; that point is staying in there. I hope that is clear in the amendments I have circulated. I wanted to make that clear.
We will be supporting the amendment, but with those that I have circulated, because it is important that we clarify some of those points. The motion will still note some of the issues that are noted in Mr Hanson’s motion, but we need to be clear about the future of the Canberra Hospital clinic.
As I said, I was always aware of the fact that it could be relocated. That is something which was noted in the discussions about the consultation paper and it was noted in the media release. I think it is something that people should have been aware of, because, particularly when you look at some of the submissions on the consultation paper, it is something that a number of groups note—as did the ACT Greens in their submission on this issue.
MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER: The question is that Ms Bresnan’s amendments to Ms Gallagher’s amendment be agreed to.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video