Page 2356 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 23 June 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MS GALLAGHER: It would not be in accordance with the policy …
We have a situation where allegations are raised in the community and they are raised by senior doctors. The minister is asked questions in here. And now we have a letter which says, “If you want to be seen on this date, we will make you 2a.” That is what this letter says. That was the bit that Ms Gallagher did not want to read from. That was the bit of the letter that she omitted to read from. It says:
… we will indicate on the faxed RFA frontsheet the earliest possible date this patient can be accommodated on this list. We can make this a ‘staged’ procedure for this date. If you accept this date, please re-categorise this patient as a ‘2a Staged Procedure’ …
Why do they need to be recategorised? Because they want a date. They are waiting. We have heard the stories of people waiting—for more than a year in some cases, for many months in any other cases—when they are urgent. We see doctors and we see patients who simply want to be operated on. They are desperately waiting for a date. ACT Health says to them, “Well, you can have a date, but you are no longer a category 1.” What does that do? It improves the category 1 figures. The category 1 figures do not show someone being treated outside the 30 days. The 95 per cent is safe. That is what we are asking about.
The minister did not give us accurate information in the Assembly. It is not accurate to say that there is no evidence of downgrading of elective surgery patients. Let me quote again:
MR HANSON: Minister, would you consider it appropriate or in accordance with policy that ACT Health would be contacting doctors to ask that they downgrade their patients?
MS GALLAGHER: It would not be in accordance with the policy …
Now she says that it is, that it is policy. She says, “No; you are reading the letter wrong.” Why do they need to be downgraded if not to change the make-up of the figures? It is no wonder that she did not want to read from that part of the letter, because that is the critical part. That is the bit that says that what Mr Wentworth and Dr Hughes were saying is actually backed up by documents.
Mr Stanhope: That is garbage.
MR SESELJA: It is actually backed up by documents.
Mr Stanhope: They are asking a question; they are not making a decision.
MR SESELJA: It is actually backed up by documents.
Mr Stanhope: Garbage.
MR SESELJA: Ms Gallagher claims that it would not be within policy. This is what she said. Mr Hanson said:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video