Page 3666 - Week 11 - Thursday, 22 September 2005
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
(1) No
The figure in the hospital datasets noted as “elective admissions” refer to all elective admissions – not just elective surgery. Admissions for medical procedures such as renal dialysis, chemotherapy and interventional cardiology are all elective in nature and are included in the “elective admissions” total.
(2) See answer to question one
(3) No
Only patients who receive surgery are counted as a removal from the elective surgery waiting list. However, all patients who complete admission procedures are included in hospital admissions data (but not in elective surgery data) in accordance with national standards on the recording of hospital activity. The relatively small resource usage required for these patients is reflected in the cost weight for their stay.
Canberra Hospital—funding
(Question No 522)
Mr Smyth asked the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 24 August 2005:
(1) Does the 2004-05 March Quarterly Capital Works Progress Report show that for The Canberra Hospital the year-to-date New Works spending as at the end of March was $71 000, yet the ‘total expenditure to date’ figure is only $21 000; if so, which is the correct figure and what funding was expended on which projects as at the end of March;
(2) Why had less than 2% of funding allocated to projects at The Canberra Hospital been expended nine months into the capital works budget;
(3) What was the total amount of expenditure as at the end of 2004-05 for new works at The Canberra Hospital and what projects was funding expended on in the June Quarter;
(4) In relation to (a) MNW Hospital Keying System Project, (b) MNSW Carpark Gaunt Place, (c) MNW Loading Dock Wash down area, (d) MNW Pathology Building, Airlock to Main Entrance and (e) MNW Canberra Community Dialysis Centre, have the projects, listed as ‘project savings’ in the 2004-05 March Quarterly Capital Works Progress Report been postponed, cancelled or otherwise and what are the reasons for the decision made around each of these projects,
(5) Why was funding allocated to these projects initially if they are now listed as project savings.
Mr Corbell: The answer to the member’s question is as follows:
(1) $71 000 is the correct expenditure, a figure of $50 000 was not transferred across to the Total Expenditure Column for the Stroke Unit project due to a formula issue in the table. This has been corrected to ensure the issue does not occur in the June Quarterly Report.
(2) All TCH MNW projects are continually reviewed against competing priorities to ensure projects with the highest operational, health, safety and security needs are authorized and funded. In October 2004 TCH requested a change to its priorities for the MNW program, on the basis that new and more urgent projects had been raised. This process of review
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .