Page 1124 - Week 03 - Thursday, 18 March 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MRS DUNNE: Yes, Mr Speaker. Minister, in discussing your preferred option at that meeting, did you offer a price?
MS GALLAGHER: No. Indeed, there was discussion around whether valuation work would need to be done around a suitable compensation for purchasing the building, but I do not imagine it would be very different to the $77 million. We are still purchasing the same building and it has not changed enormously in the last year. We did talk about whether there was a need for further valuations. At this point in time we will not pursue it further until we get agreement from the Catholic Church more broadly that they will be supportive of it because I do not want to waste further time.
MR SPEAKER: Ms Bresnan, a supplementary question?
MS BRESNAN: Minister, has the hospice, Clare Holland House, been part of the discussions with Cavalry?
MS GALLAGHER: We have talked about Clare Holland House, not in terms of selling Clare Holland House but just in terms of future operating of Clare Holland House. Little Company of Mary have made it very clear that they want to keep operating services at the hospice and would want to see that as part of any arrangement that the government and Little Company of Mary might be able to reach, should the archbishop and the Catholic church more broadly be supportive of the preferred position that we have put to them.
It is certainly there, although the focus has been very much on the hospital. That really is to enable us to develop that hospital as it needs to be developed. Here we are in government wanting to spend $200 million on a hospital. It does, at times, seem a little odd that people would be resisting that, because that is what we need to do. We cannot fund it off our budget, and that is the discussion we have had. We simply cannot—particularly now post the loss of the Commonwealth Grants Commission money—fund the upgrade of Cavalry Hospital if it has to be funded off our bottom line and essentially be a gift to the non-government sector. We just cannot do it. But we need to resolve Cavalry as soon as we can.
Little Company of Mary are supportive in principle, I think, of the discussions so far. But, as we saw under the last negotiations, there are other influences in their decision making, and we need to be clear about what position those individuals are taking.
MR SPEAKER: Supplementary question, Mr Hanson?
MR HANSON: Yes, a supplementary, Mr Speaker. Minister, will you table any analysis that has led to the preparation of this new proposal and table any correspondence arising from the meeting you had with Martin Laverty, the archbishop and Tom Brennan?
MS GALLAGHER: I would be surprised if you do not already have it, but in terms of the letters I do not see any reason why I cannot provide members with letters. At
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video