Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2010 Week 09 Hansard (Wednesday, 25 August 2010) . . Page.. 3945 ..
Mr Seselja: You were following me? Are you stalking me, Jon?
MR SPEAKER: Order!
Mr Seselja: You are taking this very personally.
MR STANHOPE: You really ought to be aware of who is around you, mate, when you are actually speaking aloud to your colleagues.
Mr Seselja: You are taking this personally.
MR STANHOPE: It’s something for you to remember in future.
Mr Seselja: If I cared whether you heard it, I might.
MR SPEAKER: Members.
MR STANHOPE: You really should, Zed—the stairwells echo a bit, mate, and I followed you down.
Mr Seselja: So what have you got? What pearls of wisdom do you want to share with us?
MR SPEAKER: Mr Seselja, thank you.
MR STANHOPE: I think I had reflected—and I think this motion does reflect—the point that Mr Hanson reminded us of in his presentation: that is, that the Liberal Party have been out of government now for over—or just on—nine years. They have occupied the opposite bench for a long time now. They actually have no experience of government, and I think at its fundamental level that is what this particular motion we are debating now reflects: a lack of understanding of the business and process of government. I think that is one of the difficulties that the government has in engaging with the opposition on this particular issue and on issues such as this in relation to the needs of our health system and the need for us to develop a coordinated, integrated health system and the fact that fundamental to the reform that the Minister for Health has been driving over recent years is not just a desire but the need for this territory to develop a truly seamless integrated public hospital and health system.
Everything that the minister has done in relation to how best to invest in Calvary—how best to get the best out of a public health system—has been directed to that end: a need for the system to work as one. It does not have that capacity whilst ever we do not own or at least control or have the managerial capacity to direct in the way that a seamless system determines.
The position that has been pursued, on the basis of advice from Treasury and the Department of Health, supported and backed up by independent advice, has been that we could not invest in Calvary Hospital without significant implications for our budget position—for our bottom line. That was the advice. That has been the