❓ Mr. Cook questions the Minister for Health regarding potential staff losses and service changes related to Irritable Bowel Disease (IBD) services, accusing the Minister of not properly reading briefing notes. The Minister defends their actions, stating the service standard would remain the same despite staff changes.
AnsweredQoN 516Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
IRRITABLE
BOWEL DISEASE SERVICES
516. Mr R.H. COOK to the
Minister for Health:
I have a supplementary question. These briefing notes make it
quite clear that staff will be lost and that services will ultimately be
changed. Does the minister now regret not reading his briefing notes properly
and simply accepting glib assurances, as he says, from the department about
those service levels?
BOWEL DISEASE SERVICES
516. Mr R.H. COOK to the
Minister for Health:
I have a supplementary question. These briefing notes make it
quite clear that staff will be lost and that services will ultimately be
changed. Does the minister now regret not reading his briefing notes properly
and simply accepting glib assurances, as he says, from the department about
those service levels?
AnswerView source ↗
I read that briefing note quite carefully. Although it said
that the service would change because two FTEs had moved to other jobs, they
were going to replace those with a quality of service that was the same. That
is all I ever said: the standard of service would be the same at the new
hospital. I never said that the people who were employed would be re-employed
at the new hospital. I never, ever said that. That was clearly not the case,
because those people did not continue. There were three nurses involved in the
thing. One of them was a specialist nurse, and two were research nurses. One
full-time equivalent was a specialist nurse, and there was to be a replacement
specialist nurse at the new hospital. The other two were involved in the
research program. They were classified as research nurses, and some of them
were paid out of research funds—a little bit of government funding, but
mostly research funds. They were looking at the opportunity to replace those
funds at the new hospital, but those people had gone. The 0.6 FTE was re-employed,
but the other one had found a new job. What the member said is not true. He
tried to show that to the media, but it was quite easy for me to show the media
the documentation and explain that what the member was saying was not true. I
think that came out quite clearly in the media presentation.
that the service would change because two FTEs had moved to other jobs, they
were going to replace those with a quality of service that was the same. That
is all I ever said: the standard of service would be the same at the new
hospital. I never said that the people who were employed would be re-employed
at the new hospital. I never, ever said that. That was clearly not the case,
because those people did not continue. There were three nurses involved in the
thing. One of them was a specialist nurse, and two were research nurses. One
full-time equivalent was a specialist nurse, and there was to be a replacement
specialist nurse at the new hospital. The other two were involved in the
research program. They were classified as research nurses, and some of them
were paid out of research funds—a little bit of government funding, but
mostly research funds. They were looking at the opportunity to replace those
funds at the new hospital, but those people had gone. The 0.6 FTE was re-employed,
but the other one had found a new job. What the member said is not true. He
tried to show that to the media, but it was quite easy for me to show the media
the documentation and explain that what the member was saying was not true. I
think that came out quite clearly in the media presentation.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.