Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source

The interjection from the member for North Sydney is ‘It should’ve remained a private hospital.’ I will not go into the details of the evolution of this one but can I say to the member for North Sydney, who has suddenly become an expert on these matters, and to the member for Lyne, who legitimately represents the interests of his constituents, that the entire saga which has gone before with this hospital, namely the evolution between private ownership and state ownership, has not been a happy one for the local constituents. That is what should drive all our concerns here.

The member for Lyne raises a concern about when we will take structural action in relation to the reform of the health and hospital system and whether it will be substantial action—if I got his question correctly. As I said prior to the last election, the Australian people are sick and tired of a blame game between the Australian government and state governments on the future reform of the health and hospital system. Some basic facts need to be put before the parliament, the first of which is the ageing of our population. Secondly, there is the growth of our population. You have seen the projections referred to by the member for Lyne in his question: up to some 35 million people by mid-century. Thirdly, there is the exponential increase in the cost of pharmaceuticals for treating those within our health and hospital system. Fourthly, there is the woeful job that has been done in times past in properly planning for our health workforce requirements—our doctors, our nurses and our allied health professionals.

All these things are bearing down on a health and hospital system which, in the advice of Christine Bennett, who delivered the National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission report not long ago, is a system now at tipping point. There are 750 public hospitals across the country. The figures when it comes to elective surgery and to treatment within clinically acceptable waiting times at accident and emergency have not seen any significant improvement over a long period of time. These are the facts.

The question is: what proposals do we have before us and how can we change that for the future? What we have got before the Australian people and of course before the health and hospital community at the moment is two sets of strategic options. One, of course, involves a partial takeover of the system by the Australian government. The second is a two-stage full Australian government takeover of the entire system. They are the strategic options we are presented with. Each of the elements of primary healthcare reform—GPs, acute hospital care, post-acute care, aged care, dental care and mental health needs—are canvassed exhaustively within that report.

Our process for making these decisions is as follows. We are going to have a meeting with the Council of Australian Governments next month and we will then, with the states and territories, discuss in detail the options that we have been presented with through that report and seek their direct response to what is canvassed in that report in addition to their statement of the strengths and weaknesses within their own systems. Secondly, we have also indicated that in the first part of 2010 we will then convene a further meeting of the Council of Australian Governments in order to bring forward our recommendations for future long-term policy reform.

My view very simply—and I put this to the member for Lyne in terms of his question—is that the days for simply frittering around the edges on this debate have gone. What we actually need is a government prepared to step up to the plate with the states and territories and embark upon a long-term policy reform.

See this speech in context