Page 1757 - Week 06 - Thursday, 19 May 1994

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


Mr Humphries, perhaps mercifully, is not present to hear Mrs Carnell saying what a horrible thing a $9m budget blow-out is. It is only half as horrible as a $17m budget blow-out. Mr Humphries has been spared the embarrassment of having to sit there supporting you while you carry on about that. The fact is that, as Arthur Andersen has shown, for many years under successive administrations, Labor and Liberal, we had problems with the administration of ACT Health. As we made clear, we tabled the report - - -

Mrs Carnell: But I asked you about the $3m savings.

MR CONNOLLY: Mrs Carnell, when the Estimates Committee sits this year you can no doubt spend many a pleasant hour with me questioning me about all the savings measures that we proposed and all the outcomes. That is the appropriate time to do that. What I can tell you is that we tabled the Arthur Andersen report and that we do not resile from it.

MRS CARNELL: I ask a supplementary question, Madam Speaker. As the Minister has referred to the Andersen Consulting report, I ask: Is it not true that this report says that Mr Berry's $3m savings were poorly developed; included several that were based upon incorrect premises, resulting in unachievable savings targets; did not include strategies for achieving savings; did not have the support of management or unions; and were introduced three months into the financial year, ignoring significant staffing overruns already incurred at the time that the budget was announced? I ask the question today so that the same thing will not occur next year, Mr Connolly. Does the Minister now agree with the Estimates Committee that the current budget is, and always was, unsustainable?

MR CONNOLLY: Madam Speaker, I think that means "spend more", although it may mean "spend less". I am not sure whether we are being criticised for not spending less - that is, we are being criticised for not achieving savings targets - or whether we are being criticised for not spending more on the basis that our budget is unsustainable, which I think probably means, although it is sometimes hard to work out from Mrs Carnell, that we have set a budget too low. I do not quite understand the question; so I cannot give a sensible answer, apart from saying that, unlike the total wall of silence that met Labor when we were in opposition questioning Mr Humphries and Mr Kaine about health blow-outs, we have tabled the report of Arthur Andersen. That is pretty much the complete picture. It is a picture which presents us with some problems. We do not resile from that. We are not trying to gild the lily. We are saying that we, as a community, have a problem. As I have said repeatedly in public places, the identical problem would face you if you were Health Minister. This report lays out a path for improvement. This Government is rolling up its sleeves and getting on with the job.


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