Senate debates

Thursday, 13 October 2011

Bills

Banking Amendment (Covered Bonds) Bill 2011; Second Reading

3:06 pm

Photo of Sue BoyceSue Boyce (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the explanation.

It is quite fascinating, isn't it: there has been a huge increase in the number of questions up to 567; three remain unanswered; and two of those are about the diabolical mess that the superclinics are currently in. The questions are based on a table that was developed by Senator Fierravanti-Wells about 12 months ago, which the department in fact thanked her for because it simplified their task of telling us how the progress was going on the development of the superclinics.

Senator Fierravanti-Wells interjecting—

Yes, Senator Fierravanti-Wells, I was about to point out that in fact the answer is not about progress; it is about complete lack of progress. In some instances it is about a complete debacle. My office has tried the best it could to give the minister the opportunity to provide the answers to these questions. We have contacted Minister Roxon's office three times in the last two days. We were afterwards advised that the answers to the questions were not with the department—they were in the minister's office. I would assume that by the time they get to the minister's office the facts are there to be seen. It is not a matter of the government having to look for the data to do it; it is waiting in Minister Roxon's office for the minister to work out how to spin her way out of the appalling situation that the data will present, when and if we get it. Minister Ludwig is perfectly aware that next week is Senate estimates. Yes, we will be happy to see this information any time, but it is very hard not to draw the conclusion that this material is being deliberately held up in the minister's office in an attempt to stop the opposition querying, as closely as possible, the complete misspend of government moneys on superclinics.

Let us just have a look at the pathetic record that they have. We have the $5 million Northern Territory superclinic scrapped. It was scrapped—the one for Darwin—because they could not find anybody who wanted to run it. Minister Roxon has the immense hide to suggest that it is somehow the problem of the member for Solomon, Mrs Natasha Griggs. 'She should have given wider support to the project,' is what the minister is trying to say. Of course, the fact that no-one applied was not the minister's fault, was it? It is yet another example of the bizarre and politically motivated way that this government has gone about the rollout of superclinics ever since they were initially developed.

Let us look at the wonderful Redcliffe superclinic. I was pleased at the last Senate estimates to ask when that would be completed. It was May at the time and the answer was midyear. So I said, 'Do you think perhaps by June 30?' People were looking as though they were going to agree with that until I produced a photo of some scaffolding—that was what the Redcliffe superclinic looked like three weeks before it was due to open. Then suddenly 'midyear' became 'by the end of August' according to the very elastic datelines set by this government and by Ms Roxon. Suddenly, end of August was when the Redcliffe superclinic would be finished.

You may not be surprised to know, Mr Deputy President, that the Redcliffe superclinic is still not finished. It has in fact been the subject of potential court action. Work has stopped. The Queensland state health minister has not only refused to provide a $3½ million loan that his own Treasury said would be okay to provide to finish the work there, he has impugned the reputations of members of the foundation and the CEO. The local state Labor member—who is the patron of the foundation—has gone into hiding and refused to come out in support of the foundation. The state health minister even had the nerve to refer this matter to the CMC—the corruption commission in Queensland—which found within minutes that there was no case to answer; there was no corruption in the area.

What we have in fact is a ridiculous game of argy-bargy going on between Minister Roxon and the Queensland state government on the topic of the Redcliffe superclinic. Yet, just after the last federal election, there we had the Prime Minister, Ms Gillard, the Minister for Health and Ageing, Nicola Roxon, the local member for Petrie, Yvette D'Ath, and the Queensland state Treasurer, Andrew Fraser, all parading around in Redcliffe with the big photo opportunity for the $20 million Redcliffe superclinic that would have been opened in June except that this government cannot sort out how to get a $3½ million loan approved or how to get it through. And the list goes on and on. In Tasmania, after a huge amount of work by Tasmanian senators and members, the government has finally admitted that one is not going to open there either. That was after they opened a brand new, wonderful superclinic in Hobart that had three GPs. It replaced a normal GP's practice that had three GPs. People were left wondering what was super about this clinic except the huge waste of money—the super waste of money—that went on turning a private GP's clinic into a different sort of private clinic with huge inputs of government funding along the way.

If GP superclinics are going to be the great panacea that this government claims they will be, why are they not where they were planned to go? I cannot even say where they are because most of them are not anywhere. The vast majority of them have not happened. If they are happening, they are well behind time or subject to potential litigation. So why are they not where they should be? It is because, if you look at a map, where they were positioned had absolutely nothing to do with need for medical services.

Comments

No comments