Page 3140 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 22 August 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
We had significant problems in estimates for health this year. Mr Rattenbury was away from estimates on personal business for the entire hearings. He advised the committee in April and offered the option of being represented during the hearing or appearing several weeks late. Because of the timing and the need to complete the report, ready for tabling in the Assembly, the committee quite rightly decided that he should be represented by another minister. It would be good if ministers could ensure that they keep at least two weeks of June free for estimates. The Chief Minister thought so too, when he said in the estimates hearing on 20 June:
I would hope Minister Rattenbury will reflect upon the level of concern this has caused and make alternative arrangements in the future. That would be my hope.
It is also my hope. There will be times when ministers have to travel during the estimates period for official business, and that is fine. However, ministers should not be away on personal business unless it cannot be avoided; for example, because of personal illness or the death of a family member. If a member is absent, it puts increased pressure on ministerial colleagues and departmental staff, who have to take on an increased workload.
In the end, Minister Rattenbury was represented by Minister Fitzharris in the mental health portfolio. Unfortunately, Minister Fitzharris herself fell ill the night before, and there were only two hours available for estimates hearings in relation to the whole of the health portfolio. This means that the estimates committee spent only two hours looking at a total appropriation of $1.6 billion, $800 million an hour.
I had hoped to raise with the Minister for Health issues of delays in a discussion paper on the structure of the office of mental health. It was due in April. At estimates we were told it would be released when the minister returned from leave. It still has not been released. Let us hope that we do not have to wait five years for that. Another important issue in mental health is the future of Brian Hennessy house. There are question marks over the future of Brian Hennessy house. Despite the inclusion of half a million dollars in this year’s budget for a spruce-up, there remains no certainty as to its future. I would hope that in future both the Minister for Health and the Minister for Mental Health will be available to avoid a repetition of the situation we saw this year.
I decided in our office that we would place the questions that were left over on notice. Imagine my surprise when I discovered that Ms Fitzharris had written to Mr Wall to advise that she was deciding on an arbitrary basis which questions she would and would not be answering. It was only due to the insistence of the chair of the committee, Mr Wall, that we received all but one of the answers we asked for from the Minister for Health. The question the minister has not answered was one she took on notice, question No 172, about the time the minister first became aware the electrical switchboard was rated as a high or extreme risk. Her inconsistency over this matter has been breathtaking. It is another example of this government’s penchant for secrecy and spin.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video