❓ Mr. L'Estrange asks about the progress of the new Perth Children's Hospital. The Minister for Health provides a detailed history, criticising the previous Labor government's handling of the project and highlighting the current government's investment.
AnsweredQoN 619Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
PERTH
CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL
619. Mr S.K. L'ESTRANGE to the Minister for Health:
Could the minister please update the house on the progress of
this government's efforts to deliver a new, world-class children's
hospital, and on the history of this long-awaited and important project?
CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL
619. Mr S.K. L'ESTRANGE to the Minister for Health:
Could the minister please update the house on the progress of
this government's efforts to deliver a new, world-class children's
hospital, and on the history of this long-awaited and important project?
AnswerView source ↗
Before I start, I acknowledge the fantastic students from the
Living Waters Lutheran College in the back row of the gallery. They are a great
bunch of kids who just joined me for lunch. Thanks, Mr Speaker, for letting
them sit in your gallery. I almost got around to asking you, Mr Speaker!
Several members interjected.
Dr K.D. HAMES : It
is a retrospective request!
Replacement of the children's hospital has an interesting
history. As we discussed earlier in grievance time in this Parliament, the
original proposal for the replacement of the hospital came out of the Reid
review. As I said, the Labor Party at the time of the review intended to reduce
the number of beds from 256 to 178 beds, which was a reduction of 78 beds.
However, there is a bit more of a
chequered history than that. The first iteration of what needed to happen came
after the Reid review in 2004. On 21 September 2005, the minister at the time,
Mr McGinty, announced that because Labor was closing Royal Perth Hospital as a
tertiary hospital, the new children's hospital would fit into the north
block of Royal Perth Hospital. That was the first allocation of money for that.
An allocation of $50 million had been made in 2004–05 for keeping
Princess Margaret Hospital going. Then the next allocation came in 2008–09
when $200-odd million was put aside for that relocation. I have to say that it
did not last very long. The then government could not get any of the medical or
allied health nursing staff to agree that that was a good idea, particularly
when there was strong opposition to the closure of Royal Perth Hospital. The
government therefore decided to go back to relocating it at Sir Charles
Gairdner Hospital, but still with no money. In 2005 there was a bit of money
for keeping PMH going. By 2007, when Labor had been in government for six
years, the media and the public were starting to get pretty upset.
In September 2007 a report in The West Australian referred to the government needing to spend
millions of dollars to fix the ageing children's hospital and to the
doctors and nurses saying that they had no firm commitment about the timing.
There was $15 million for capital works but not enough to maintain the budget.
Our good friend—or the opposition's good friend—Mark
Olson said that everything at Princess Margaret Hospital was going backwards.
He said that the government of the day was only doing window-dressing; that the
plans for both Fiona Stanley Hospital and Princess Margaret Hospital were all
up in the air; that things were getting desperate, especially with the extent
of care; and that they could not get the staff that were needed because the
operations were so bad. He said that the thinking was that no decision was
being made and was at least 10 years away, there was bad infrastructure, there
was population growth, a baby boom was coming and there were shocking parking
facilities. All these things were in the reports that came out at that time
about the hospital. Again The West reported that 22 nurses in six weeks had resigned from the special care
nurseries and that there was a shortage of 50 nurses at Princess Margaret
Hospital and King Edward Memorial Hospital. I point out that the shortage today
is 4.6 nurses. It was another example of the Labor Party not planning for
future health services in this state. When we came to government, there was
still only $200 million allocated for the new hospital. Estimates in the
reports at the time stated that the total cost might be $500 million.
Mrs M.H. Roberts :
It's a very long answer.
Dr K.D. HAMES : No,
I do not think it is.
At the end of the day, this side of the house will spend $1.2
billion creating a state-of-the-art children's hospital, which will be
one of the best hospitals that this state and this country will ever see. The
whole history of health planning in this state by the Labor Party has been a
debacle. Members gave a great example of Labor's hypocrisy today during
grievance time when they supported a hospital with 178 beds and are now
complaining that we are putting in almost 120 beds additional to the number
they proposed.
Living Waters Lutheran College in the back row of the gallery. They are a great
bunch of kids who just joined me for lunch. Thanks, Mr Speaker, for letting
them sit in your gallery. I almost got around to asking you, Mr Speaker!
Several members interjected.
Dr K.D. HAMES : It
is a retrospective request!
Replacement of the children's hospital has an interesting
history. As we discussed earlier in grievance time in this Parliament, the
original proposal for the replacement of the hospital came out of the Reid
review. As I said, the Labor Party at the time of the review intended to reduce
the number of beds from 256 to 178 beds, which was a reduction of 78 beds.
However, there is a bit more of a
chequered history than that. The first iteration of what needed to happen came
after the Reid review in 2004. On 21 September 2005, the minister at the time,
Mr McGinty, announced that because Labor was closing Royal Perth Hospital as a
tertiary hospital, the new children's hospital would fit into the north
block of Royal Perth Hospital. That was the first allocation of money for that.
An allocation of $50 million had been made in 2004–05 for keeping
Princess Margaret Hospital going. Then the next allocation came in 2008–09
when $200-odd million was put aside for that relocation. I have to say that it
did not last very long. The then government could not get any of the medical or
allied health nursing staff to agree that that was a good idea, particularly
when there was strong opposition to the closure of Royal Perth Hospital. The
government therefore decided to go back to relocating it at Sir Charles
Gairdner Hospital, but still with no money. In 2005 there was a bit of money
for keeping PMH going. By 2007, when Labor had been in government for six
years, the media and the public were starting to get pretty upset.
In September 2007 a report in The West Australian referred to the government needing to spend
millions of dollars to fix the ageing children's hospital and to the
doctors and nurses saying that they had no firm commitment about the timing.
There was $15 million for capital works but not enough to maintain the budget.
Our good friend—or the opposition's good friend—Mark
Olson said that everything at Princess Margaret Hospital was going backwards.
He said that the government of the day was only doing window-dressing; that the
plans for both Fiona Stanley Hospital and Princess Margaret Hospital were all
up in the air; that things were getting desperate, especially with the extent
of care; and that they could not get the staff that were needed because the
operations were so bad. He said that the thinking was that no decision was
being made and was at least 10 years away, there was bad infrastructure, there
was population growth, a baby boom was coming and there were shocking parking
facilities. All these things were in the reports that came out at that time
about the hospital. Again The West reported that 22 nurses in six weeks had resigned from the special care
nurseries and that there was a shortage of 50 nurses at Princess Margaret
Hospital and King Edward Memorial Hospital. I point out that the shortage today
is 4.6 nurses. It was another example of the Labor Party not planning for
future health services in this state. When we came to government, there was
still only $200 million allocated for the new hospital. Estimates in the
reports at the time stated that the total cost might be $500 million.
Mrs M.H. Roberts :
It's a very long answer.
Dr K.D. HAMES : No,
I do not think it is.
At the end of the day, this side of the house will spend $1.2
billion creating a state-of-the-art children's hospital, which will be
one of the best hospitals that this state and this country will ever see. The
whole history of health planning in this state by the Labor Party has been a
debacle. Members gave a great example of Labor's hypocrisy today during
grievance time when they supported a hospital with 178 beds and are now
complaining that we are putting in almost 120 beds additional to the number
they proposed.
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.