Page 4339 - Week 14 - Wednesday, 27 November 2013
Authority, the NIPA, the IPA, the my hospitals website and the COAG reform council. We are probably reporting data to at least eight different organisations at the moment who then go through their own process of checking that data.
To call that into question in a general sense, as Mr Hanson consistently does and has done in the media release he issued today, further demeans the work of the Health Directorate. The Health Directorate is not just two doctors or three doctors; it is actually a whole range of staff who work very hard to instil a sense of pride and, I think, confidence in the public health system that Mr Hanson consistently seeks to undermine.
That is the most unfortunate thing about all of the motions that Mr Hanson brings to this Assembly on health. While he is trying to get to me, it is a much broader point he is making. He is calling into question the accuracy and the quality of the data in a very important area of government service delivery. He has no evidence to back up the claims he makes other than in the emergency department. I simply will not accept that broad-brush approach. It is not fair. It is not fair on lots and lots of people who work very hard. The results are being seen in the elective surgery performance.
We are meeting our targets. In fact, we are exceeding our targets in categories 1 and 3 and we are one per cent off our target in category 2. We are performing more operations than ever before. More people are being seen than ever before. More people are being seen on time than ever before. And the number of people who are waiting too long for care is the lowest it has ever been.
Instead of dealing with a motion like this, there should actually be a motion that congratulates all of these people. It should not congratulate me. I do not want any congratulations and I do not seek any. But there should be a motion that congratulates the Health Directorate for the work that they have done, the way they have approached the job that the government has asked them to do and the results that they are delivering.
That would be a more appropriate use of the Assembly’s time and, frankly, it would provide the community with some sense that people in the Assembly are genuinely trying to improve the health system in an area that matters, which is operations. That is what matters in elective surgery.
MR HANSON (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (5.22): The opposition will not be supporting the amendment. As much as the minister would accuse me of making a stump speech, she has just delivered one of her own. Her stump speech essentially goes along these lines: “Jeremy hates you all. He’s only got bad things to say. It’s not true. There’s nothing to see here. There’s nothing going wrong. This isn’t fair. It isn’t true.” But as has been shown in respect of a number of issues that have been litigated in this place, many of the issues that have been raised in the community by patients, by surgeons and by doctors’ groups have proved to be correct.
The Auditor-General’s review of 2011 was nothing but scathing. I stood up to speak to this before Mr Rattenbury does to make the point that there were allegations made in 2010. There was significant doubt in the community about what was happening