Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Hansard source

I too rise to speak on the response given by the Minister representing the Minister for Health and Ageing. This is just another example of the debacle that has become health in this country. Minister Roxon has to rank amongst the most incompetent in the line of incompetent government ministers in the Gillard government. Not one day goes past without some problem occurring in this portfolio. What Senator Boyce said in relation to the GP superclinics typifies just how appallingly this woman has run that portfolio.

The problems that we are seeing with the Redcliffe GP superclinic are only the tip of the iceberg. It is very clear that at some point in time the Commonwealth knew that there was a major problem with the Redcliffe GP superclinic. My question to the government is: how long have you known and what have you been covering up in relation to the Redcliffe superclinic? You now know that the proverbial is going to hit the fan and you are taking as long as you can to keep it out of the public arena. That is what this is all about. This is about Minister Roxon not wanting to give out important information in relation to superclinics because she knows that we are now going to start, as Senator Boyce correctly said, examining the fine print, examining the detail, of not just Redcliffe but Sorell, Darwin and all the other debacles of this whole superclinic fiasco.

This table has been routinely provided. Indeed, I was the one that originally drew up the table which gave us a status of GP superclinics. The last one that we have is dated 19 May. The procedure that we have adopted is that, to facilitate the progress of questioning in the community affairs committee and to save the time of the committee, the department has provided us with an update on a routine basis. However, this time, it is the very question that is still outstanding. It is the very question about which Minister Ludwig says, yes, he is conscious of the fact that estimates are on next week and he is conscious of the fact that we need this answer. The point is that it has been sitting on the minister's desk. I would like to know how long it has been sitting on the minister's desk. Why has this not been released to us?

GP superclinics were the great part of the so-called health reform, all tied up with Kevin Rudd and Nicola Roxon running around the countryside in their hospital attire, looking like they were actually doing something to do with hospitals. Might I add as an aside, so much for the 3,000 or so new hospital beds that they promised around the countryside. In New South Wales we have only had 11 extra beds. So much for the thousands that they promised but have not delivered.

The philosophy behind the GP superclinics is what really underlies this government's philosophy in relation to primary care—that is, that shift away from the family doctor. We will shove everybody in, like the national health system, which of course has hardly been a success in other countries—

Senator Polley interjecting—

Yes, we have, Senator Polley. If you had been actually listening in these committees, where you sit for hours and hours, you would have heard some of the evidence that has been given by various people. Evidence has shown that some of the programs that this government is running are a deliberate attempt by this government to drive a wedge through private health and, most importantly, primary care and choice of doctor.

We were going to have about 29 or 30 GP superclinics. How many are actually up and running? Only a handful. But if you go onto the website of the Department of Health and Ageing you will see these little maps with dots everywhere. They are trying, duplicitously, to imply that this is where these superclinics are—all over the countryside. In fact, they are not. If you look at the various proposed superclinic sites, you will see that the majority of them—which it was promised would be delivered long before now—are all behind in terms of both their establishment and the nature of the services they are supposed to be delivering.

Redcliffe, for example, which Senator Boyce talked about, is going to demonstrate where the whole thing is going to unravel. Let me remind the Senate that most of the contracts that are given to these superclinics are for 20 years and that they are given to organisations, for the purchase of buildings or other facilities, from which the Commonwealth will not get back the resources. In effect, the government is subsidising organisations to make these purchases, often in circumstances where they are displacing established private GP services in the area.

To the minister I say that today's example and today's response to these questions is simply not satisfactory. It is very clear that the minister is hiding behind the delay. She knows that the detail of the Commonwealth's relationship with the Redcliffe Hospital Foundation, the various project plans, the budget, the financing requirements and the costs that were required by the various funding agreements, will demonstrate that the Commonwealth has not undertaken the appropriate scrutiny and the appropriate examination of this GP superclinic. It will demonstrate that the Commonwealth has not been keeping proper governance over this project.

This is the one that is now in the spotlight, but my question to the government is: if this is the problem with the Redcliffe superclinic, are delays with other superclinics—of which we do not yet know the details—for the same reasons? Those reasons being the lack of proper governance and what appears to be the lack of proper scrutiny by the Commonwealth. Minister, can I have your assurance that we are not going to get this answer at 9 am on Wednesday, when we are due to commence estimates? That would be the ultimate travesty but it is what I would expect of this government, because it is very clear that this government will resort to whatever means are necessary to keep proper information away from the Australian public.