Page 1634 - Week 05 - Thursday, 7 April 2005

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

(1) The list of measures implemented at The Canberra Hospital (TCH) prior to ambulance bypass (load sharing) are described in the attached memo “Emergency Department Load Sharing (Bypass)” of 22 November 2004.

(2) This list of measures does not include telling staff that they need to or should skip meal breaks and work harder.

The leaked email from the Deputy General Manager TCH was a personal email to the duty Admitting Officer (and the Director) summarizing a conversation with the Admitting Officer a few minutes prior to the email. The duty Admitting Officer was responsible for overseeing the operations of the Emergency Department at that time. In that conversation the Deputy General Manager had asked the duty Admitting Officer to personally work harder and organize his staff to resolve the situation that he perceived had developed. The Deputy General Manager had also asked the Admitting Officer to ensure that staff return promptly from breaks (meaning at the completion of the breaks).

Staff were not told to skip meal breaks.

There was no intention to imply that staff were not working hard.

A copy of the attachment is available at the Chamber Support Office.

(Question No 278)

Mr Stefaniak asked the Minister for the Environment, upon notice, on 10 March 2005:

(1) Has the ACT had a system of “accredited kangaroo cullers”;

(2) What is the legal basis for such “accreditation”;

(3) Have all such cullers had their accreditation cancelled recently;

(4) What is the legal basis for such action;

(5) What is the (a) minimum and (b) maximum calibre of rifle allowed by law for the culling of kangaroos in the ACT;

(6) What is the legal basis for such restriction;

(7) May kangaroos be legally culled in daylight in the ACT;

(8) Are the current accuracy tests for cullers in the ACT conducted at night;

(9) How many public officials, including police officers, are involved in each test;

(10) Apart from police officers, what other officials are involved in each test;

(11) Are accredited cullers required to restrict themselves to the firearm with which they passed the test, even if re-barrelled; if so, under what legal basis;

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