❓ A parliamentary question regarding the effectiveness of the four-hour rule in WA public hospitals since 2008. The Minister for Health responds by highlighting improvements and criticising the previous Labor government's handling of healthcare.
AnsweredQoN 386Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
EMERGENCY DEPARTMENTS — FOUR-HOUR RULE
I refer to the article regarding the four-hour rule in The West Australian newspaper yesterday and the editorial in the paper today. Could the minister please update the house on the four-hour rule and how it has improved our public hospital system since the government was elected in 2008? Dr K.D. HAMES
I refer to the article regarding the four-hour rule in The West Australian newspaper yesterday and the editorial in the paper today. Could the minister please update the house on the four-hour rule and how it has improved our public hospital system since the government was elected in 2008? Dr K.D. HAMES
AnswerView source ↗
Mr Speaker — Mr R.H. Cook : Don’t repeat yourself. Dr K.D. HAMES : I will try not to; I saved a bit of stuff! Mr R.H. Cook : You have used up all your best material! Dr K.D. HAMES : No; I said I have saved it. I have before me a copy of a letter that was written to the editor of The West in response to a story in the local paper about the four-hour rule. Sadly, it did not get a run; therefore, I will reveal some of its contents. The doctor who wrote it is an emergency physician, co-director of the Fremantle Hospital emergency department, clinical lead for the four-hour rule at Fremantle Hospital and on the expert panel advising the commonwealth on the implementation of the targets that will be brought in Australia-wide. I will read some extracts from his letter — Two years ago I became involved in the program because it was the best chance I was going to have to improve patient care at a system level after watching a decade or so of worsening access block (where a patient has to wait more than eight hours to get into a bed). Just to remind some members about what it was like in those days, I hold a copy of an article from 10 August 2008—just before the last election. Mr F.M. Logan : Forty-hour rule! Dr K.D. HAMES : The 40-hour rule. The article has the title “40hr wait in corridor”. It states — A horror 40-hour wait for emergency surgery has made health the most important election issue for Dianella pensioners … Mr E.S. Ripper : Who wrote that article? Dr K.D. HAMES : Anthony DeCeglie. We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Dr K.D. HAMES replied: Mr Speaker — Mr R.H. Cook : Don’t repeat yourself. Dr K.D. HAMES : I will try not to; I saved a bit of stuff! Mr R.H. Cook : You have used up all your best material! Dr K.D. HAMES : No; I said I have saved it. I have before me a copy of a letter that was written to the editor of The West in response to a story in the local paper about the four-hour rule. Sadly, it did not get a run; therefore, I will reveal some of its contents. The doctor who wrote it is an emergency physician, co-director of the Fremantle Hospital emergency department, clinical lead for the four-hour rule at Fremantle Hospital and on the expert panel advising the commonwealth on the implementation of the targets that will be brought in Australia-wide. I will read some extracts from his letter — Two years ago I became involved in the program because it was the best chance I was going to have to improve patient care at a system level after watching a decade or so of worsening access block (where a patient has to wait more than eight hours to get into a bed). Just to remind some members about what it was like in those days, I hold a copy of an article from 10 August 2008—just before the last election. Mr F.M. Logan : Forty-hour rule! Dr K.D. HAMES : The 40-hour rule. The article has the title “40hr wait in corridor”. It states — A horror 40-hour wait for emergency surgery has made health the most important election issue for Dianella pensioners … Mr E.S. Ripper : Who wrote that article? Dr K.D. HAMES : Anthony DeCeglie. We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Mr Speaker — Mr R.H. Cook : Don’t repeat yourself. Dr K.D. HAMES : I will try not to; I saved a bit of stuff! Mr R.H. Cook : You have used up all your best material! Dr K.D. HAMES : No; I said I have saved it. I have before me a copy of a letter that was written to the editor of The West in response to a story in the local paper about the four-hour rule. Sadly, it did not get a run; therefore, I will reveal some of its contents. The doctor who wrote it is an emergency physician, co-director of the Fremantle Hospital emergency department, clinical lead for the four-hour rule at Fremantle Hospital and on the expert panel advising the commonwealth on the implementation of the targets that will be brought in Australia-wide. I will read some extracts from his letter — Two years ago I became involved in the program because it was the best chance I was going to have to improve patient care at a system level after watching a decade or so of worsening access block (where a patient has to wait more than eight hours to get into a bed). Just to remind some members about what it was like in those days, I hold a copy of an article from 10 August 2008—just before the last election. Mr F.M. Logan : Forty-hour rule! Dr K.D. HAMES : The 40-hour rule. The article has the title “40hr wait in corridor”. It states — A horror 40-hour wait for emergency surgery has made health the most important election issue for Dianella pensioners … Mr E.S. Ripper : Who wrote that article? Dr K.D. HAMES : Anthony DeCeglie. We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Mr R.H. Cook : Don’t repeat yourself. Dr K.D. HAMES : I will try not to; I saved a bit of stuff! Mr R.H. Cook : You have used up all your best material! Dr K.D. HAMES : No; I said I have saved it. I have before me a copy of a letter that was written to the editor of The West in response to a story in the local paper about the four-hour rule. Sadly, it did not get a run; therefore, I will reveal some of its contents. The doctor who wrote it is an emergency physician, co-director of the Fremantle Hospital emergency department, clinical lead for the four-hour rule at Fremantle Hospital and on the expert panel advising the commonwealth on the implementation of the targets that will be brought in Australia-wide. I will read some extracts from his letter — Two years ago I became involved in the program because it was the best chance I was going to have to improve patient care at a system level after watching a decade or so of worsening access block (where a patient has to wait more than eight hours to get into a bed). Just to remind some members about what it was like in those days, I hold a copy of an article from 10 August 2008—just before the last election. Mr F.M. Logan : Forty-hour rule! Dr K.D. HAMES : The 40-hour rule. The article has the title “40hr wait in corridor”. It states — A horror 40-hour wait for emergency surgery has made health the most important election issue for Dianella pensioners … Mr E.S. Ripper : Who wrote that article? Dr K.D. HAMES : Anthony DeCeglie. We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Dr K.D. HAMES : I will try not to; I saved a bit of stuff! Mr R.H. Cook : You have used up all your best material! Dr K.D. HAMES : No; I said I have saved it. I have before me a copy of a letter that was written to the editor of The West in response to a story in the local paper about the four-hour rule. Sadly, it did not get a run; therefore, I will reveal some of its contents. The doctor who wrote it is an emergency physician, co-director of the Fremantle Hospital emergency department, clinical lead for the four-hour rule at Fremantle Hospital and on the expert panel advising the commonwealth on the implementation of the targets that will be brought in Australia-wide. I will read some extracts from his letter — Two years ago I became involved in the program because it was the best chance I was going to have to improve patient care at a system level after watching a decade or so of worsening access block (where a patient has to wait more than eight hours to get into a bed). Just to remind some members about what it was like in those days, I hold a copy of an article from 10 August 2008—just before the last election. Mr F.M. Logan : Forty-hour rule! Dr K.D. HAMES : The 40-hour rule. The article has the title “40hr wait in corridor”. It states — A horror 40-hour wait for emergency surgery has made health the most important election issue for Dianella pensioners … Mr E.S. Ripper : Who wrote that article? Dr K.D. HAMES : Anthony DeCeglie. We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Mr R.H. Cook : You have used up all your best material! Dr K.D. HAMES : No; I said I have saved it. I have before me a copy of a letter that was written to the editor of The West in response to a story in the local paper about the four-hour rule. Sadly, it did not get a run; therefore, I will reveal some of its contents. The doctor who wrote it is an emergency physician, co-director of the Fremantle Hospital emergency department, clinical lead for the four-hour rule at Fremantle Hospital and on the expert panel advising the commonwealth on the implementation of the targets that will be brought in Australia-wide. I will read some extracts from his letter — Two years ago I became involved in the program because it was the best chance I was going to have to improve patient care at a system level after watching a decade or so of worsening access block (where a patient has to wait more than eight hours to get into a bed). Just to remind some members about what it was like in those days, I hold a copy of an article from 10 August 2008—just before the last election. Mr F.M. Logan : Forty-hour rule! Dr K.D. HAMES : The 40-hour rule. The article has the title “40hr wait in corridor”. It states — A horror 40-hour wait for emergency surgery has made health the most important election issue for Dianella pensioners … Mr E.S. Ripper : Who wrote that article? Dr K.D. HAMES : Anthony DeCeglie. We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Dr K.D. HAMES : No; I said I have saved it. I have before me a copy of a letter that was written to the editor of The West in response to a story in the local paper about the four-hour rule. Sadly, it did not get a run; therefore, I will reveal some of its contents. The doctor who wrote it is an emergency physician, co-director of the Fremantle Hospital emergency department, clinical lead for the four-hour rule at Fremantle Hospital and on the expert panel advising the commonwealth on the implementation of the targets that will be brought in Australia-wide. I will read some extracts from his letter — Two years ago I became involved in the program because it was the best chance I was going to have to improve patient care at a system level after watching a decade or so of worsening access block (where a patient has to wait more than eight hours to get into a bed). Just to remind some members about what it was like in those days, I hold a copy of an article from 10 August 2008—just before the last election. Mr F.M. Logan : Forty-hour rule! Dr K.D. HAMES : The 40-hour rule. The article has the title “40hr wait in corridor”. It states — A horror 40-hour wait for emergency surgery has made health the most important election issue for Dianella pensioners … Mr E.S. Ripper : Who wrote that article? Dr K.D. HAMES : Anthony DeCeglie. We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
I have before me a copy of a letter that was written to the editor of The West in response to a story in the local paper about the four-hour rule. Sadly, it did not get a run; therefore, I will reveal some of its contents. The doctor who wrote it is an emergency physician, co-director of the Fremantle Hospital emergency department, clinical lead for the four-hour rule at Fremantle Hospital and on the expert panel advising the commonwealth on the implementation of the targets that will be brought in Australia-wide. I will read some extracts from his letter — Two years ago I became involved in the program because it was the best chance I was going to have to improve patient care at a system level after watching a decade or so of worsening access block (where a patient has to wait more than eight hours to get into a bed). Just to remind some members about what it was like in those days, I hold a copy of an article from 10 August 2008—just before the last election. Mr F.M. Logan : Forty-hour rule! Dr K.D. HAMES : The 40-hour rule. The article has the title “40hr wait in corridor”. It states — A horror 40-hour wait for emergency surgery has made health the most important election issue for Dianella pensioners … Mr E.S. Ripper : Who wrote that article? Dr K.D. HAMES : Anthony DeCeglie. We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Mr F.M. Logan : Forty-hour rule! Dr K.D. HAMES : The 40-hour rule. The article has the title “40hr wait in corridor”. It states — A horror 40-hour wait for emergency surgery has made health the most important election issue for Dianella pensioners … Mr E.S. Ripper : Who wrote that article? Dr K.D. HAMES : Anthony DeCeglie. We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Dr K.D. HAMES : The 40-hour rule. The article has the title “40hr wait in corridor”. It states — A horror 40-hour wait for emergency surgery has made health the most important election issue for Dianella pensioners … Mr E.S. Ripper : Who wrote that article? Dr K.D. HAMES : Anthony DeCeglie. We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Dr K.D. HAMES : Anthony DeCeglie. We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
[See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
[See page 4487.]
Dr K.D. HAMES replied: Mr Speaker — Mr R.H. Cook : Don’t repeat yourself. Dr K.D. HAMES : I will try not to; I saved a bit of stuff! Mr R.H. Cook : You have used up all your best material! Dr K.D. HAMES : No; I said I have saved it. I have before me a copy of a letter that was written to the editor of The West in response to a story in the local paper about the four-hour rule. Sadly, it did not get a run; therefore, I will reveal some of its contents. The doctor who wrote it is an emergency physician, co-director of the Fremantle Hospital emergency department, clinical lead for the four-hour rule at Fremantle Hospital and on the expert panel advising the commonwealth on the implementation of the targets that will be brought in Australia-wide. I will read some extracts from his letter — Two years ago I became involved in the program because it was the best chance I was going to have to improve patient care at a system level after watching a decade or so of worsening access block (where a patient has to wait more than eight hours to get into a bed). Just to remind some members about what it was like in those days, I hold a copy of an article from 10 August 2008—just before the last election. Mr F.M. Logan : Forty-hour rule! Dr K.D. HAMES : The 40-hour rule. The article has the title “40hr wait in corridor”. It states — A horror 40-hour wait for emergency surgery has made health the most important election issue for Dianella pensioners … Mr E.S. Ripper : Who wrote that article? Dr K.D. HAMES : Anthony DeCeglie. We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Mr Speaker — Mr R.H. Cook : Don’t repeat yourself. Dr K.D. HAMES : I will try not to; I saved a bit of stuff! Mr R.H. Cook : You have used up all your best material! Dr K.D. HAMES : No; I said I have saved it. I have before me a copy of a letter that was written to the editor of The West in response to a story in the local paper about the four-hour rule. Sadly, it did not get a run; therefore, I will reveal some of its contents. The doctor who wrote it is an emergency physician, co-director of the Fremantle Hospital emergency department, clinical lead for the four-hour rule at Fremantle Hospital and on the expert panel advising the commonwealth on the implementation of the targets that will be brought in Australia-wide. I will read some extracts from his letter — Two years ago I became involved in the program because it was the best chance I was going to have to improve patient care at a system level after watching a decade or so of worsening access block (where a patient has to wait more than eight hours to get into a bed). Just to remind some members about what it was like in those days, I hold a copy of an article from 10 August 2008—just before the last election. Mr F.M. Logan : Forty-hour rule! Dr K.D. HAMES : The 40-hour rule. The article has the title “40hr wait in corridor”. It states — A horror 40-hour wait for emergency surgery has made health the most important election issue for Dianella pensioners … Mr E.S. Ripper : Who wrote that article? Dr K.D. HAMES : Anthony DeCeglie. We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Mr R.H. Cook : Don’t repeat yourself. Dr K.D. HAMES : I will try not to; I saved a bit of stuff! Mr R.H. Cook : You have used up all your best material! Dr K.D. HAMES : No; I said I have saved it. I have before me a copy of a letter that was written to the editor of The West in response to a story in the local paper about the four-hour rule. Sadly, it did not get a run; therefore, I will reveal some of its contents. The doctor who wrote it is an emergency physician, co-director of the Fremantle Hospital emergency department, clinical lead for the four-hour rule at Fremantle Hospital and on the expert panel advising the commonwealth on the implementation of the targets that will be brought in Australia-wide. I will read some extracts from his letter — Two years ago I became involved in the program because it was the best chance I was going to have to improve patient care at a system level after watching a decade or so of worsening access block (where a patient has to wait more than eight hours to get into a bed). Just to remind some members about what it was like in those days, I hold a copy of an article from 10 August 2008—just before the last election. Mr F.M. Logan : Forty-hour rule! Dr K.D. HAMES : The 40-hour rule. The article has the title “40hr wait in corridor”. It states — A horror 40-hour wait for emergency surgery has made health the most important election issue for Dianella pensioners … Mr E.S. Ripper : Who wrote that article? Dr K.D. HAMES : Anthony DeCeglie. We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Dr K.D. HAMES : I will try not to; I saved a bit of stuff! Mr R.H. Cook : You have used up all your best material! Dr K.D. HAMES : No; I said I have saved it. I have before me a copy of a letter that was written to the editor of The West in response to a story in the local paper about the four-hour rule. Sadly, it did not get a run; therefore, I will reveal some of its contents. The doctor who wrote it is an emergency physician, co-director of the Fremantle Hospital emergency department, clinical lead for the four-hour rule at Fremantle Hospital and on the expert panel advising the commonwealth on the implementation of the targets that will be brought in Australia-wide. I will read some extracts from his letter — Two years ago I became involved in the program because it was the best chance I was going to have to improve patient care at a system level after watching a decade or so of worsening access block (where a patient has to wait more than eight hours to get into a bed). Just to remind some members about what it was like in those days, I hold a copy of an article from 10 August 2008—just before the last election. Mr F.M. Logan : Forty-hour rule! Dr K.D. HAMES : The 40-hour rule. The article has the title “40hr wait in corridor”. It states — A horror 40-hour wait for emergency surgery has made health the most important election issue for Dianella pensioners … Mr E.S. Ripper : Who wrote that article? Dr K.D. HAMES : Anthony DeCeglie. We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Mr R.H. Cook : You have used up all your best material! Dr K.D. HAMES : No; I said I have saved it. I have before me a copy of a letter that was written to the editor of The West in response to a story in the local paper about the four-hour rule. Sadly, it did not get a run; therefore, I will reveal some of its contents. The doctor who wrote it is an emergency physician, co-director of the Fremantle Hospital emergency department, clinical lead for the four-hour rule at Fremantle Hospital and on the expert panel advising the commonwealth on the implementation of the targets that will be brought in Australia-wide. I will read some extracts from his letter — Two years ago I became involved in the program because it was the best chance I was going to have to improve patient care at a system level after watching a decade or so of worsening access block (where a patient has to wait more than eight hours to get into a bed). Just to remind some members about what it was like in those days, I hold a copy of an article from 10 August 2008—just before the last election. Mr F.M. Logan : Forty-hour rule! Dr K.D. HAMES : The 40-hour rule. The article has the title “40hr wait in corridor”. It states — A horror 40-hour wait for emergency surgery has made health the most important election issue for Dianella pensioners … Mr E.S. Ripper : Who wrote that article? Dr K.D. HAMES : Anthony DeCeglie. We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Dr K.D. HAMES : No; I said I have saved it. I have before me a copy of a letter that was written to the editor of The West in response to a story in the local paper about the four-hour rule. Sadly, it did not get a run; therefore, I will reveal some of its contents. The doctor who wrote it is an emergency physician, co-director of the Fremantle Hospital emergency department, clinical lead for the four-hour rule at Fremantle Hospital and on the expert panel advising the commonwealth on the implementation of the targets that will be brought in Australia-wide. I will read some extracts from his letter — Two years ago I became involved in the program because it was the best chance I was going to have to improve patient care at a system level after watching a decade or so of worsening access block (where a patient has to wait more than eight hours to get into a bed). Just to remind some members about what it was like in those days, I hold a copy of an article from 10 August 2008—just before the last election. Mr F.M. Logan : Forty-hour rule! Dr K.D. HAMES : The 40-hour rule. The article has the title “40hr wait in corridor”. It states — A horror 40-hour wait for emergency surgery has made health the most important election issue for Dianella pensioners … Mr E.S. Ripper : Who wrote that article? Dr K.D. HAMES : Anthony DeCeglie. We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
I have before me a copy of a letter that was written to the editor of The West in response to a story in the local paper about the four-hour rule. Sadly, it did not get a run; therefore, I will reveal some of its contents. The doctor who wrote it is an emergency physician, co-director of the Fremantle Hospital emergency department, clinical lead for the four-hour rule at Fremantle Hospital and on the expert panel advising the commonwealth on the implementation of the targets that will be brought in Australia-wide. I will read some extracts from his letter — Two years ago I became involved in the program because it was the best chance I was going to have to improve patient care at a system level after watching a decade or so of worsening access block (where a patient has to wait more than eight hours to get into a bed). Just to remind some members about what it was like in those days, I hold a copy of an article from 10 August 2008—just before the last election. Mr F.M. Logan : Forty-hour rule! Dr K.D. HAMES : The 40-hour rule. The article has the title “40hr wait in corridor”. It states — A horror 40-hour wait for emergency surgery has made health the most important election issue for Dianella pensioners … Mr E.S. Ripper : Who wrote that article? Dr K.D. HAMES : Anthony DeCeglie. We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Mr F.M. Logan : Forty-hour rule! Dr K.D. HAMES : The 40-hour rule. The article has the title “40hr wait in corridor”. It states — A horror 40-hour wait for emergency surgery has made health the most important election issue for Dianella pensioners … Mr E.S. Ripper : Who wrote that article? Dr K.D. HAMES : Anthony DeCeglie. We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Dr K.D. HAMES : The 40-hour rule. The article has the title “40hr wait in corridor”. It states — A horror 40-hour wait for emergency surgery has made health the most important election issue for Dianella pensioners … Mr E.S. Ripper : Who wrote that article? Dr K.D. HAMES : Anthony DeCeglie. We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Dr K.D. HAMES : Anthony DeCeglie. We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
We see underneath the article heading a term commonly used in those days—“Health care ‘in crisis’”. That is what we used to face under the Labor Party: health care in crisis. At the time we had 40 to 50 per cent access block; that is, patients waiting for more than eight hours for a bed. Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Mr T.R. Buswell : That was The Sunday Times wasn’t it? Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Dr K.D. HAMES : The Sunday Times as well. Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Mr T.R. Buswell interjected. Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Dr K.D. HAMES : Exactly. The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
The letter from the doctor I quoted earlier continues — The consequence of access block from a patient’s perspective is being lined up on hard trolleys in corridors where they have been for 24 or 48 hours. It goes on to say — Western Australia’s access block was the worst in the country, in fact my hospital’s was the worst in the country at around 60–70% of patients not getting into the hospital within eight hours. It is now around 10%. Therefore, there has been massive improvement in our hospitals. No wonder they like it. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. I can tell members sincerely that, to the best of my knowledge, this doctor is totally apolitical. Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Mr E.S. Ripper : What is his name? Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Dr K.D. HAMES : I will tell the Leader of the Opposition after; I do not want to give his name now. This doctor is the only Western Australian on the federal clinical league, which I spoke of before, so it is easy for the Leader of the Opposition to get the name—he can just ring Hon Nicola Roxon. The letter continues — I have no vested interest in the politics of health, only in a better health system. What we are seeing with the Four Hour Rule Program is real sustainable change for the benefit of our patients. His last comment reads — As an Australian, I am so very tired of seeing opposition parties damage excellent reform processes for a political end. I believe our politicians should be more responsible than that. That is exactly true: members opposite should be more responsible! I would like to go through some of the other articles that we found in the newspaper. One headline reads “300 deaths in waiting”. Another article related to research done by Dr Spyropoulos at Fremantle Hospital in around 2003, 2004, or something of that order, in which he assessed the number of patients who died needlessly because they waited in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours. Dr Spyropoulos estimated that about 300 patients would die each year. That was just the tip of the iceberg, and behind that were all those people who had some other problem as a result of waiting in our emergency departments for longer than eight hours, such as losing a limb, which they might not have otherwise lost. They did not die, but they had another significant medical problem as a result. That article was written in 2008. Another article reads — AMA state emergency medicine spokesman Dave Mountain said 55 per cent of emergency patients at some major hospitals were waiting longer than eight hours … In 2003, Western Australia’s access block was 25 to 30 per cent, but it could be up to 50 per cent. The situation got worse and worse under the previous government. I have a graph that shows what people thought of the health system under the previous government. The graph is titled “Extent to Which Emergency Departments are Considered a Problem” and was commissioned by the government of the time, the Labor government. The white bit is “not a problem”; the black bit is “a major problem”. What colour do members think is most prominent on that graph? It is black! At least 50 per cent of patients thought there was a major problem or a very serious problem, and a very small percentage—roughly five per cent—thought there were no problems. I will quickly wind up with the last graph, which shows the access block under the former government and a yellow line showing when the Liberal–National government introduced the four-hour rule; and this other line shows what it is now—it is right down. Under the Labor government 300 patients a year were dying needlessly. Now we have the access block, the number is right down here! That is directly as a result of the four-hour rule. The four-hour rule is a fantastic system. It is extremely successful, and it does the opposition no credit at all when they attack the hard working doctors, nurses and allied health staff who are making it work. Point of Order Mr J.C. KOBELKE : I have a point of order. The minister spent seven minutes wasting our time! The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
The SPEAKER : I give the member for Balcatta the opportunity to ask questions in this place. I previously gave him the opportunity to make a point of order, but not to make statements of that nature. I formally call you to order for the first time today. Tabling of Papers Mr R.H. COOK : The minister quoted extensively from a letter, a number of newspaper articles and charts. I ask whether he would table each of those documents. The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
The SPEAKER : If they are official documents. Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Dr K.D. HAMES : I am happy to table the copies of the newspaper articles, but the letter is not an official document. I am more than happy to show that to you, Mr Speaker. [See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
[See papers 3495 and 3496.] Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Mr M. McGOWAN : The minister was quoting extensively from a letter that he had received. I seek your ruling on whether that is an official document. The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
The SPEAKER : The minister has indicated he will show me the letter. At this point I would rule that the letter is not an official document, but I will make a decision on that, member for Rockingham, by the end of question time. Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
Mr A.P. O’Gorman interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
The SPEAKER : Member for Joondalup, I formally call you to order for the first time today. I am going to look at the letter, and if I decide it should be tabled, it will be tabled. [See page 4487.]
[See page 4487.]
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.