Page 1278 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 23 March 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MS GALLAGHER: Because this was not our preferred option. We wanted to—
Mr Seselja: So you did not examine the other options? You just had one.
MR SPEAKER: Mr Seselja, you have asked your question.
MS GALLAGHER: He has asked about 25, Mr Speaker. If I am going to get all of the questions today, I would prefer it if question time was conducted in a way that was respectful to the chamber, which has not been the case. So, in a way—
Mr Seselja: Are you playing victim again or what?
MS GALLAGHER: Well, it has not, Mr Seselja. I am trying to work with you and answer your questions but every time I go to answer them you interject with another question. The answer is that this was not the preferred way forward. The government clearly indicated to all stakeholders that we wanted to own and operate Calvary Public Hospital. We felt that that would deliver the outcome that we needed in relation to capital and it would allow us better networking across the two hospitals. That was something that Little Company of Mary agreed with.
As a large healthcare provider across Australia, they recognised the efficiencies in terms of being a two public hospital town and having those two public hospitals managed by the one entity. They accepted that. There were many supporters for us taking over management and ownership of Calvary Public Hospital but that is not going to be the case now. We have moved to a second preferred option.
MR SPEAKER: Yes, Ms Bresnan, a supplementary question?
MS BRESNAN: Will the provision of a 30-year contract to LCM for the running of the hospice still be a part of the deal?
MS GALLAGHER: We have not gone to any of that detail yet, Ms Bresnan. We have not gone to that level of detail, Ms Bresnan, yet. All we have done is have a meeting of a number of individuals where we have put to those individuals our preferred way forward. We have had no specific discussions, from my point of view, in relation to the hospice other than that the Little Company of Mary would like to continue to operate the hospice. That is the point of the discussions that we have had. We are not going to pursue anything further until we get an indication from the Catholic Church that this is a model that they would support.
MR SPEAKER: Yes, Ms Porter, a supplementary question?
MS PORTER: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Minister, are you still working towards a better integration and networking between Canberra’s two public hospitals in light of this?
MS GALLAGHER: Thanks, Ms Porter. Under the very early stages of discussions, as they are up to at this point, we have put on the table to Little Company of Mary that we would like to see a much improved arrangement for networking, role delineation
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video