Question regarding a $338,000 review into the Metropolitan Health Service Board, questioning its purpose and potential overlap with the Health Administrative Review Committee (HARC). The Minister defends the review as due diligence following departmental restructuring and criticizes the previous government's management.

AnsweredQoN 274Legislative Assembly
Asked
22 August 2001
Member
Portfolio
Health

QuestionView source ↗

METROPOLITAN HEALTH SERVICE BOARD, REVIEW
I refer the minister to the $338 000 review currently under way into the no longer existing Metropolitan Health Service Board, and ask - (1) Why is this review being conducted? (2) Will this review in any way duplicate the work of the Health Administrative Review Committee? (3) If not, what areas of health service management will the review consider, that the HARC did not? Mr KUCERA

AnswerView source ↗

I thank the member for the question. (1)-(3) The review is not designed to override what HARC is doing, and in fact will complement it. The main reason for the review is that the Government has peeled off a layer of bureaucracy from the Health Department, which had entered into numerous contracts and consultancies. As that layer of bureaucracy was peeled away - and incidentally resulted in $4 million being added to the patient assisted transport scheme - a whole raft of due-diligence functions had to be carried out. Unfortunately, under the previous Government, the capacity to carry out this kind of due-diligence review was severely decimated by the way that the whole of the Health Department was run down. It is necessary, unfortunately, to use a properly constituted and professional consultancy group to do this. Already consultancies in the health area have been cut dramatically from what was being carried out before.
(1) Why is this review being conducted? (2) Will this review in any way duplicate the work of the Health Administrative Review Committee? (3) If not, what areas of health service management will the review consider, that the HARC did not? Mr KUCERA replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(3) The review is not designed to override what HARC is doing, and in fact will complement it. The main reason for the review is that the Government has peeled off a layer of bureaucracy from the Health Department, which had entered into numerous contracts and consultancies. As that layer of bureaucracy was peeled away - and incidentally resulted in $4 million being added to the patient assisted transport scheme - a whole raft of due-diligence functions had to be carried out. Unfortunately, under the previous Government, the capacity to carry out this kind of due-diligence review was severely decimated by the way that the whole of the Health Department was run down. It is necessary, unfortunately, to use a properly constituted and professional consultancy group to do this. Already consultancies in the health area have been cut dramatically from what was being carried out before.
(2) Will this review in any way duplicate the work of the Health Administrative Review Committee? (3) If not, what areas of health service management will the review consider, that the HARC did not? Mr KUCERA replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(3) The review is not designed to override what HARC is doing, and in fact will complement it. The main reason for the review is that the Government has peeled off a layer of bureaucracy from the Health Department, which had entered into numerous contracts and consultancies. As that layer of bureaucracy was peeled away - and incidentally resulted in $4 million being added to the patient assisted transport scheme - a whole raft of due-diligence functions had to be carried out. Unfortunately, under the previous Government, the capacity to carry out this kind of due-diligence review was severely decimated by the way that the whole of the Health Department was run down. It is necessary, unfortunately, to use a properly constituted and professional consultancy group to do this. Already consultancies in the health area have been cut dramatically from what was being carried out before.
(3) If not, what areas of health service management will the review consider, that the HARC did not? Mr KUCERA replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(3) The review is not designed to override what HARC is doing, and in fact will complement it. The main reason for the review is that the Government has peeled off a layer of bureaucracy from the Health Department, which had entered into numerous contracts and consultancies. As that layer of bureaucracy was peeled away - and incidentally resulted in $4 million being added to the patient assisted transport scheme - a whole raft of due-diligence functions had to be carried out. Unfortunately, under the previous Government, the capacity to carry out this kind of due-diligence review was severely decimated by the way that the whole of the Health Department was run down. It is necessary, unfortunately, to use a properly constituted and professional consultancy group to do this. Already consultancies in the health area have been cut dramatically from what was being carried out before.
Mr KUCERA replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(3) The review is not designed to override what HARC is doing, and in fact will complement it. The main reason for the review is that the Government has peeled off a layer of bureaucracy from the Health Department, which had entered into numerous contracts and consultancies. As that layer of bureaucracy was peeled away - and incidentally resulted in $4 million being added to the patient assisted transport scheme - a whole raft of due-diligence functions had to be carried out. Unfortunately, under the previous Government, the capacity to carry out this kind of due-diligence review was severely decimated by the way that the whole of the Health Department was run down. It is necessary, unfortunately, to use a properly constituted and professional consultancy group to do this. Already consultancies in the health area have been cut dramatically from what was being carried out before.
I thank the member for the question. (1)-(3) The review is not designed to override what HARC is doing, and in fact will complement it. The main reason for the review is that the Government has peeled off a layer of bureaucracy from the Health Department, which had entered into numerous contracts and consultancies. As that layer of bureaucracy was peeled away - and incidentally resulted in $4 million being added to the patient assisted transport scheme - a whole raft of due-diligence functions had to be carried out. Unfortunately, under the previous Government, the capacity to carry out this kind of due-diligence review was severely decimated by the way that the whole of the Health Department was run down. It is necessary, unfortunately, to use a properly constituted and professional consultancy group to do this. Already consultancies in the health area have been cut dramatically from what was being carried out before.
(1)-(3) The review is not designed to override what HARC is doing, and in fact will complement it. The main reason for the review is that the Government has peeled off a layer of bureaucracy from the Health Department, which had entered into numerous contracts and consultancies. As that layer of bureaucracy was peeled away - and incidentally resulted in $4 million being added to the patient assisted transport scheme - a whole raft of due-diligence functions had to be carried out. Unfortunately, under the previous Government, the capacity to carry out this kind of due-diligence review was severely decimated by the way that the whole of the Health Department was run down. It is necessary, unfortunately, to use a properly constituted and professional consultancy group to do this. Already consultancies in the health area have been cut dramatically from what was being carried out before.

Explore WA Government Data

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

Explore more