Page 4837 - Week 15 - Wednesday, 14 December 2005
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
put on the ready for care list and the second eye operation on the not ready for care list. As soon as the first eye has been operated on, the second eye operation is put on the ready for care list.
The second classification is of people who have sought a delay to their surgery due to social reasons. These include travel overseas, work commitments and carer commitments. The third classification is of people who are medically unfit for surgery. Given that a large number of the people on the elective surgery waiting list are older people, it is common that other complicating factors result in deferral of surgery.
Disability services—transport
MR HARGREAVES: Yesterday, Mrs Burke asked me a question about a decision to withdraw transport to group homes for people with a disability in the ACT? The answer is that there has been no decision to withdraw transport to group homes for people with a disability in the ACT.
Emergency Services Authority—expenditure
MR HARGREAVES: In answer to a question from Mr Pratt, I undertook to get further information relating particularly to the Treasurer’s advance. I draw Mr Pratt’s attention to the answer to his question No 500 of 23 August this year—it is in the Hansard—which details the Treasurer’s advance of $5.449 million. Mr Pratt either has forgotten or has not read the answer to the question that he put on the notice paper. I would expect nothing else.
Further, I draw the Assembly’s attention to Auditor-General’s Report No 7 of 2005 at pages 52 and 53, but more particularly page 52. I would like to read into the Hansard four highlights of the Auditor-General’s report that Mr Pratt and Mr Smyth neglected to put onto the record. They are:
An unqualified audit opinion was provided to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services on 23 August 2005.
The Authority’s corporate governance framework is still developing.
The Authority generally managed to budget as its net costs of services did not significantly exceed the amended budget.
The budgeted operating surplus was not achieved due to capital injection funding not being fully drawn down because of the discontinuation of two major projects.
Page 53 of the report refers to the two particular projects, the Belconnen and west Belconnen joint emergency service centre projects. I believe that the Auditor-General has given the Emergency Services Authority a notably clean bill of health.
Personal explanations
MR MULCAHY (Molonglo): Mr Speaker, I seek to make a personal explanation pursuant to standing order 46.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .