Mark Baker (Braddon, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The choice of the Mersey hospital as an innovative pilot for a community governed model has been based on sound reason and research. Whilst, due to serious mismanagement by state government entities, Australia has many hospitals at risk—some 700 being the most recent number touted by the Leader of the Opposition—the Australian government would be economically irresponsible if it tried to save all hospitals. However, what is economically responsible is to provide required funding to a major regional facility that is a linchpin to the long-term sustainability of a region, both economically and socially.

Both state and Australian governments in the past have, when necessary, provided packages to regional facilities, including sporting, business, community services and infrastructure, to sustain developing regions. The Mersey hospital package is no different. The Mersey region has extenuating circumstances that supported this decision. The No. 1 priority for the Australian government was the safety and wellbeing of this thriving community in north-west Tasmania. The question of funding concerns over the implementation of the state government’s Future Health within the region created an initial catalyst. The downgrading of services without a plan for the commencement of upgrades into the Launceston and Burnie hospitals led to my office becoming a medical referral centre. However, this was only the first consideration prior to the decision.

Major economic and regional development considerations came into play to support this action. The Mersey region is one of the fastest-growing regions in the state and the country. The quoted range for growth is between 5.5 and eight per cent per annum, which is based upon 2006 ABS statistics. The growth is occurring due not to internal birthrate growth but rather to investment and relocation of families to the region. Decisions by families and investors to relocate are based on many factors. The key factor is the availability of services—in particular, health services. The downgrading of the Mersey hospital would be economically damaging to the continued growth of the region, which would be totally unacceptable. Local businesses, current and those moving to the region, have strongly voiced their concern at the impact that downgraded health services at the Mersey hospital would have on the region, especially as those businesses actively seek to hire new staff to relocate to north-west Tasmania.

Currently there is $400 million on the planning board for investment into the region. This $400 million represents over 3,000 jobs for the region and income to our local retail, trade, and service businesses throughout the north-west coast. The downgrading of the Mersey hospital, where the hospital is one of the largest businesses in the region, would have a dramatic effect for the north-west region. As the ‘medical income’ is redirected outside of the region, to Launceston and Hobart, so less subsidiary business in the region occurs. The region has already suffered from the continual closing of state government businesses due to centralisation in Hobart or Launceston, resulting in job and business activity loss. Businesses who have the Mersey hospital as a major client would suffer economic loss, and there would be the subsequent loss of jobs in the region by the removal of income from the economic landscape.

Another disturbing factor that came from direct discussions between medical staff, Mersey employees and the government was the fact that many of the key medical resources intended to leave the region and, for that matter, the state. Such an exodus would place both North West Regional Hospital campuses in a dire situation. Other important considerations that were addressed in the decision included supporting the Australian government’s Rural Clinical School and its students located on the north-west coast, the growing aged-care facilities and the University of Tasmania north-west Campus.

This innovative and exciting package being provided to the Mersey hospital will support the long-term sustainability of the north-west coast and protect the future social, economic and community needs of the region. Then, once this learning curve has been conquered, the Australian government will be in a position to support the possibility of the community model throughout Australian regional locations, which is very exciting for all regional areas of Australia. Finally, I conclude that this exciting innovative pilot would not be possible if not for the excellent economic management of the Australian federal government over the past 11 years.