Bob Baldwin (Paterson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Tourism) Share this | Hansard source

Tonight I rise to address the National Health and Hospitals Network Bill 2010. I oppose this legislation because it directly affects federal funding going into the expansion of bureaucracy rather than into front-line services. My constituents demand that increased health dollars are focused on health outcomes, not building bureaucracies. When former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd was elected in 2007, it was on the back of promises to make our health system better. He promised ‘to take the pressure off emergency departments, free up hospital beds and reduce waiting lists’. He said, ‘I will work cooperatively to get our hospitals fixed, but in the end the buck will stop with me.’ The buck did not stop with Kevin Rudd. Instead, the buck was channelled into a massive national media campaign to promote Labor’s health plan.

As Kirsty Needham reported for the Fairfax media on 24 October this year:

The federal government’s health reforms, negotiated with the states, were the subject of a $9.3 million advertising spend over six weeks. This compares to $9 million spent by the Health Department over eight months on advertising relating to the H1N1, or swine flu, vaccine.

While Mr Rudd is no longer leader, Prime Minister Gillard has continued his grand promises. Sadly, these promises have not translated into health reform in my electorate of Paterson, where my office regularly receives calls from patients who have experienced unsatisfactory treatment. My constituents are still having trouble getting in to see a doctor, still having trouble accessing after hours care, still waiting months to see a specialist and still experiencing the never-ending and increasing waiting lists to get into hospital for surgery.

Political grandstanding means absolutely nothing to someone who is forced to spend the night in pain until the local health service opens at 9 am. It means nothing to someone who has to wait two months to have a tumour removed, or to a family who has to worry about a day off work and fuel costs because their specialist’s office is hours away. Introducing legislation into this House which broadens the health bureaucracy, rather than funding front line services, is an insult to my constituents. Increasing the bureaucracy will not ensure that my constituents get the service they require and deserve. That can be achieved only through consultation with local people, including professionals, who live in the area and work on the relevant issues each and every day.

Changes to the health and hospital system in Australia should be based on outcomes in the community, not on building bureaucracies. It was the Gillard Labor government’s focus on broad promises, rather than locally based outcomes, that led it to announce $7 million for a GP superclinic in my electorate of Paterson at Raymond Terrace. Many hours of discussion with patients and health providers, including Hunter Rural Division of General Practice and GP Access, which represents urban practitioners, has informed me that this funding could have been better spent to meet more outcomes in the community. I have therefore spoken and written to the Minister for Health and Ageing, Nicola Roxon, to implore her to adopt an alternative proposal. That proposal is backed by general practitioners and allied health providers who work in my community.

Our proposal is that the $7 million be divided so it can be invested in not one project but across three. Firstly, the $2.5 million should be spent on the already approved Health One clinic in Raymond Terrace. The New South Wales government first started planning this project in 2005 and the Hunter New England Area Health Service has now purchased a block of land at the old swimming pool site in Raymond Terrace. Capital works documentation has been sent to the New South Wales Department of Health and preliminary concept plans have been drawn up. Meanwhile, a development application has also been prepared for lodging with Port Stephens Council in preparation of starting construction in 2011. Everything going to plan, this facility will open its doors by mid-2012, offering general practitioner services as well as hosting community health, allied health, visiting specialists and other ambulatory care providers. Importantly, this proposal has the support of all the medical professionals in my electorate and in that region.

Spending $7 million on one clinic just down the road from where the state government is already planning to build its own clinic is nothing but a waste and duplication. The Health One clinic will be operating long before a superclinic could be operating. Further, $7 million is an extraordinary sum of money considering the fact that the GP superclinic that has already been built and is operational at Nelson Bay cost just $2.5 million. This $7 million in expenditure proposal has occurred only because the Gillard Labor government failed to talk to the right people, local people, about the health needs in the Paterson electorate. There were no meetings, no consultations, GP Access representing urban practitioners was not consulted, Hunter Rural Division of General Practice was not consulted—and they represent the rural practitioners in my area—and yet $7 million was apportioned for the GP superclinic.

Smart spending would see $2.5 million spent on the Health One clinic. That would leave $4.5 million for other worthy projects. There is no doubt that this represents value for money for the taxpayer, which is always important. It is a government’s duty to invest taxpayers’ funds wisely. It is also a government’s duty to represent those it serves, and what my constituents need is better health services in the Medowie-Tilligerry-Salt Ash area, as well as an increased GP presence in the Dungog-Clarence Town area. Recently, Clarence Town lost its last GP service because its only doctor retired. Local community groups have been crying out for a replacement service not only since losing their GP but also for the months prior. Despite this forewarning, the Gillard Labor government did nothing to assist. In fact, it refused a funding application from Dr Drew in Dungog, who was trying to expand his practice to accommodate the needs of people in Clarence Town.

I have met personally with members of the Dungog and Clarence Town Country Women’s Association and the Clarence Town Lions Club, who are working to find a way forward. Like Dungog-Clarence Town, the community around the Medowie-Tilligerry-Salt Ash region also needs increased health services. Demand is only increasing owing to the substantial residential growth in the suburbs, which includes RAAF personnel currently serving at RAAF Base Williamtown. Prior to the 2007 election, local RAAF personnel were promised a defence family healthcare clinic by Labor. However, despite winning government, that clinic was never delivered. In fact, it was one of the first promises broken by this Labor government. Thus, families who moved into the area have already missed out under the Labor government and now face increased pressure in not being able to see a GP. Many are now forced to travel outside the electorate into Newcastle in order to access the services that they need.

Therefore I would call on the Gillard Labor government to spend the $4½ million in savings on new health infrastructure for the areas that I have just mentioned. The projects could be put out to tender in order to get the best value for money and the best value for the community. Commonsense investments such as these are important for regional communities like the Paterson electorate, where there is fast residential growth and a rapidly ageing population. We must begin to prepare for our new residents now so that future communities do not suffer a lack of services.

The National Health and Hospitals Network Bill 2010 is designed to expand the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality of Health Care, which was set up by the coalition. The role of that commission is to be expanded to include ‘setting national clinical standards and strengthened clinical governance’. As part of this agenda, the Gillard Labor government has also flagged its intention to establish an independent hospital pricing authority and a national performance authority. It is therefore concerning that neither of those authorities has been detailed in this bill, and should legislation outlining them be presented to the House I would consider the issue.

The cost of expanding the commission, including the establishment of those authorities, was included in this year’s budget at a price of $236.5 million. It is the coalition’s view that this funding should instead be directed towards frontline services, including a major boost to mental health facilities. The funding could also cover the cost of the local health infrastructure needed across the country. In my electorate of Paterson, there is a need for a chemotherapy unit in Forster-Tuncurry. I have met with the management of Forster Private Hospital, which would be pleased to operate the unit for both public and private patients alike. Currently, chemotherapy patients have to travel to Taree, Port Macquarie, Newcastle or Sydney for treatment. This is an unnecessary stress, for both patients and their families, which could be avoided with a relatively small funding investment. A whole unit including computer systems, refrigeration, intravenous pumps and armchairs could be established for just over $30,000.

Similarly, the Cape Hawke Community Hospital and Health Association, which leases Forster Private Hospital, is in need of a hydrotherapy pool to service the community. A budget for this project has already been completed and the pool could be built for $750,000. This infrastructure would support a variety of patients with a variety of health needs. Hydrotherapy pools can be used to assist elderly patients with movement, for rehabilitation and pain relief and for treating illnesses such as rheumatic diseases, just to name a few. Unfortunately, the Gillard Labor government rejected funding for this worthwhile project under the latest round of the National Rural and Remote Health Infrastructure Program, despite a detailed submission prepared by the association. That is why I made it one of my priorities prior to the August election, when I committed the necessary funding under a coalition government. Parties aside, I now call on the government to meet this promise and, at the same time, meet the real need in the Paterson electorate.

I would like to finish by reminding this House that without our health we can do very little else. That is why real outcomes and improvements must be the priority for new legislation. When I am out and about speaking to my constituents, from Raymond Terrace in the south to Forster in the north, I am always told about the need for a hospital, more beds, another GP, specialist services, longer health operating hours—and the list goes on and on, such is the need. Never do people implore me for another level of bureaucracy. That is why I cannot support this, without being absolutely certain that it will lead to the increased frontline services that I have just mentioned. I am not convinced that the current bill satisfies the needs of my constituents.

See this speech in context