Page 4582 - Week 12 - Thursday, 15 October 2009

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

MR SPEAKER: Ms Burch, a supplementary question?

MS BURCH: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Can the minister outline the investment that the minister is making in ACT Health that will improve the outcomes and indicators in the areas of concern?

MS GALLAGHER: The whole capital asset development plan, which is around the infrastructure build, plus the work that is going on around workforce and new models of care, is designed to improve the public health system and improve on results where there are areas of pressure. Obviously, more operating theatres, more beds and more staff will allow greater throughput of elective surgery. I cannot control who goes on the list, but I can control who comes off the list. You do that via the throughput, which is extra investment in staff and infrastructure and money for the procedures themselves.

That is what this government has done. We have taken a long-term view about the rebuild of our health system. It is well underway now. It would be nice if the Liberal opposition could actually indicate whether they support that 10-year plan and focus on areas across the infrastructure and in terms of service delivery, but, as we see in so many areas with this lazy, sloppy opposition, there is just no engagement at all—none.

MR SPEAKER: Mr Hanson, a supplementary question?

MR HANSON: Minister, is one possible explanation for these appalling results that your Treasury responsibilities are distracting you from your health minister responsibilities?

MS GALLAGHER: The short answer to that is no. The longer answer is that unlike those opposite who are challenged when it comes to how much output they can deliver to the community, I work tirelessly for this community. I work harder than my family probably wants me to work. I have a capacity which is obviously greater than Mr Hanson’s, who seems worried about my workload. I take his worry most genuinely—not! For the benefit of Hansard, that was said with a level of sarcasm.


MR SMYTH: My question is to the Treasurer. Treasurer, I note that in the most recent budget you indicated that new spending initiatives would account for an average annual spend of $49 million and that you now propose to spend $68 million on the proposed Calvary hospital purchase. Treasurer, how much additional cash have you, as Treasurer, given your approval to spend since the May budget?

MS GALLAGHER: I will have to take that on notice. There have been a couple of requests for Treasurer’s advance that I am aware of which we are currently working through. I have received several pieces of correspondence around requests for either transfers or rollovers of appropriation and, indeed, some requests for new appropriations. I will have to take that on notice.

MR SPEAKER: Mr Smyth, a supplementary?

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