Page 212 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 28 November 2012

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


In relation to some of the other issues that Mr Hanson mentioned, I will go to the issue of the review. The model of care was negotiated by the clinicians themselves with input from a whole range of areas. The ANF have not been warning me for three years that the Centenary hospital was not built to capacity. In fact, I recall a conversation within the last year where that issue has been raised with me. That is simply not true, and I do not believe that Mr Hanson has any evidence to support the claim that for three years I was told something different.

The model of care that was implemented at the Centenary Hospital for Women and Children required that a woman stay a minimum of six hours after a birth, but that for women who were well they would look to be discharged within 24 hours. But the minimum would be six hours, and that was for a healthy woman, a healthy baby and someone who wanted to leave the hospital.

I have had several complaints. I have not been inundated with complaints. I have certainly had a couple of complaints; I have also had more letters saying the hospital is great and thank you for the care that has been provided than I have had complaints. But, yes, I have had a couple of complaints directly to me around women who feel they would have liked to have stayed longer but could not or were asked to leave to create room for other women to come in. I have also had two midwives speak to me, so let us just deal with the facts. Mr Hanson has had one midwife; I have had two midwives talk to me at different functions I was at about how they feel the model as it is being implemented places pressure on them to encourage women to leave early. So based on the two midwives that have spoken to me and two women who have had babies there, I spoke to the director-general and asked her to commission a review into the model of care as I felt that it needed to be looked at with fresh eyes considering what is happening in practice.

The director-general is undertaking that review; there will be independent expert opinion taken as part of that and experts will provide input into the review. The terms of reference and the final report will be released. We release all reviews that I can think of. There was one that was not released in relation to the Public Interest Disclosure Act, and I put on the record again, as I have for the last three years, that I did not determine that that review would—

Mr Hanson: You set it up that way to cover it up.

MS GALLAGHER: Mr Assistant Speaker, that is simply incorrect and Mr Hanson knows it. He should be required to withdraw that, unless he has got evidence to prove it actually was my decision to set up a public interest disclosure. As Mr Hanson would know, the minister does not have the decision-making power in relation to that, and there is no evidence to support that interjection from Mr Hanson. It is a lie and he continues to lie by peddling that in this place.

I am more than happy for the review to be public, and the terms of reference will be public. Independent experts will provide input into that review. We will consult with everyone, but the review is into the model of care. The review is not into the


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