Page 2447 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 17 June 2009

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


the decision to commit a billion dollars to our health system, they had a pretty clear understanding of what they were doing. One would hope that they did not say, “Here’s a billion dollars; we’ll put it in the health system somewhere.” One would anticipate that if they were committing a billion dollars of taxpayers’ money they had a pretty comprehensive plan for that. Again, that is not apparent. Either at that stage they understood that this is what they were going to be pursuing or they decided that they were going to commit a billion dollars without the appropriate analysis. Either is somewhat damning in my view.

I will again quote from what the government said in the lead-up to the 2001 election when they were in opposition, because it is worth repeating after the debate we have had today:

Good government has the courage to allow itself to be closely scrutinised. It conducts its operations in an open, honest and accountable manner, not in secret.

… Labor rejects behind “closed-door” deals and the failure of process—a failure of process that has left a legacy …

And they talk about sinister deals and secret deals. What you are hearing is similar language to what we are putting forward, but what you do not have here is a government who have lived up to the rhetoric that they provided when they were in opposition. Hopefully if we become the government in 2012, we will ensure that we do.

A number of people have given opinions for and against the Calvary sale/purchase, but I will just read a quote that I think is a good one from Andrew Podger, the President of the Institute of Public Administration of Australia and former secretary of the commonwealth health department, in reference to the sale:

But where is the debate about the most important issue: which arrangement is most likely to deliver high quality and efficient hospital services to patients?

I think that is a fair question to raise, and that is the point that we have been making all day and through the estimates process. It is not whether it is or is not a good idea. It may be a fantastic idea, but until we are given proof then it would be negligent of us to commit to it in the sort of time line that the health minister is demanding of us.

So, what is it that we do want? What we want is a comprehensive business plan with the evidence that provides us and the community with confidence that this is the right decision and that what is being put forward is appropriate. We want to know what the alternatives are, because, at the moment, the suggestion is: “Do this or the whole health system collapses. We can’t do anything in the north of Canberra. There won’t be enough hospital beds.” What are the options? If that is the case then this adds to the weight of logic behind the purchase of Calvary, and surely in the development of a billion dollar plan, they have come up with a series of alternatives and options for the future of the health plan. I find it incomprehensible that they would not.

We are also asking for extensive consultation. I remember at the last election, all of us—the Greens, Liberals and Labor—were all talking about the need for extensive


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