Ms. Mettam questions the Minister for Health regarding the decision-making process for the Women's and Babies' Hospital, specifically the lack of consideration for clinical outcomes in the Infrastructure WA report. The Minister defends the decision based on infrastructure deliverability and previous clinical planning.

AnsweredQoN 517Legislative Assembly
Asked
16 August 2023
Portfolio
Health

QuestionView source ↗

WOMEN'S AND
BABIES' HOSPITAL — NEONATAL SURGICAL PROCEDURES
517. Ms L. METTAM to the Minister for Health:
I have a supplementary question. How
can the minister stand by this decision when the justification—the
Infrastructure WA report—did not consider clinical outcomes?

AnswerView source ↗

The business case is around the
deliverability of the infrastructure and it outlines the time frame, risks and
sequence of work. That is the reality. All
of the former clinical services planning was right to identify the Queen
Elizabeth II Medical Centre site.
That is why we went ahead with that site, because that was the best-case
scenario. However, the infrastructure
experts who will have to build the hospital and keep Sir Charles Gairdner
Hospital and Perth Children's Hospital running said, ''You
can't do this.''
Ms L. Mettam : It was a desktop
report.
Ms A. SANDERSON : The Leader of the Liberal Party
should read the whole document.
Ms L. Mettam : I did.
Ms A. SANDERSON : All 180
pages?
Ms L. Mettam : I have.
Ms A. SANDERSON : No, she has
not. If she has read that business case and hand on heart says that she would
continue, she is reckless and irresponsible.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER : Order, please!

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more