❓ A WA parliamentary question raises concerns about the lack of remuneration review and indemnity for chairs of country hospital medical advisory committees, prompting a response outlining ongoing consideration and existing ex gratia support policies.
AnsweredQoN 778Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to doctors who agree to become chairmen of country hospital medical advisory committees. (1) Why has the modest remuneration for these duties not been revised since 1993? (2) When will it be reviewed? (3) Why are these people not indemnified by the Department of Health when other employees such as directors of nursing and medical directors, as well as general members of the medical advisory committees, are indemnified? (4) Will the Government take steps to correct this inequitable situation? (5) If not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The issue of remuneration of chairs of country hospital medical advisory committees is being actively considered in the context of a range of other issues, including indemnity. (3)-(5) It is longstanding government policy to provide adequate ex gratia support to persons, whether employees or members of government boards or committees, including medical advisory committees, who become the subject of legal proceedings as a consequence of carrying out responsibilities of a public nature. This support is given provided that the relevant conduct was in good faith and reasonable and, of course, that the provision of indemnity is compatible with any relevant contractual or other arrangement with the person seeking indemnity. Each application is determined on its merits. There is no reason in principle that an application for indemnity by a chairman of a medical advisory committee would be treated by government any differently from an application by an ordinary member of such a committee. Officers from the Department of Health are not aware of any claim being made against a member of a medical advisory committee.
(1) Why has the modest remuneration for these duties not been revised since 1993? (2) When will it be reviewed? (3) Why are these people not indemnified by the Department of Health when other employees such as directors of nursing and medical directors, as well as general members of the medical advisory committees, are indemnified? (4) Will the Government take steps to correct this inequitable situation? (5) If not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The issue of remuneration of chairs of country hospital medical advisory committees is being actively considered in the context of a range of other issues, including indemnity. (3)-(5) It is longstanding government policy to provide adequate ex gratia support to persons, whether employees or members of government boards or committees, including medical advisory committees, who become the subject of legal proceedings as a consequence of carrying out responsibilities of a public nature. This support is given provided that the relevant conduct was in good faith and reasonable and, of course, that the provision of indemnity is compatible with any relevant contractual or other arrangement with the person seeking indemnity. Each application is determined on its merits. There is no reason in principle that an application for indemnity by a chairman of a medical advisory committee would be treated by government any differently from an application by an ordinary member of such a committee. Officers from the Department of Health are not aware of any claim being made against a member of a medical advisory committee.
(2) When will it be reviewed? (3) Why are these people not indemnified by the Department of Health when other employees such as directors of nursing and medical directors, as well as general members of the medical advisory committees, are indemnified? (4) Will the Government take steps to correct this inequitable situation? (5) If not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The issue of remuneration of chairs of country hospital medical advisory committees is being actively considered in the context of a range of other issues, including indemnity. (3)-(5) It is longstanding government policy to provide adequate ex gratia support to persons, whether employees or members of government boards or committees, including medical advisory committees, who become the subject of legal proceedings as a consequence of carrying out responsibilities of a public nature. This support is given provided that the relevant conduct was in good faith and reasonable and, of course, that the provision of indemnity is compatible with any relevant contractual or other arrangement with the person seeking indemnity. Each application is determined on its merits. There is no reason in principle that an application for indemnity by a chairman of a medical advisory committee would be treated by government any differently from an application by an ordinary member of such a committee. Officers from the Department of Health are not aware of any claim being made against a member of a medical advisory committee.
(3) Why are these people not indemnified by the Department of Health when other employees such as directors of nursing and medical directors, as well as general members of the medical advisory committees, are indemnified? (4) Will the Government take steps to correct this inequitable situation? (5) If not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The issue of remuneration of chairs of country hospital medical advisory committees is being actively considered in the context of a range of other issues, including indemnity. (3)-(5) It is longstanding government policy to provide adequate ex gratia support to persons, whether employees or members of government boards or committees, including medical advisory committees, who become the subject of legal proceedings as a consequence of carrying out responsibilities of a public nature. This support is given provided that the relevant conduct was in good faith and reasonable and, of course, that the provision of indemnity is compatible with any relevant contractual or other arrangement with the person seeking indemnity. Each application is determined on its merits. There is no reason in principle that an application for indemnity by a chairman of a medical advisory committee would be treated by government any differently from an application by an ordinary member of such a committee. Officers from the Department of Health are not aware of any claim being made against a member of a medical advisory committee.
(4) Will the Government take steps to correct this inequitable situation? (5) If not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The issue of remuneration of chairs of country hospital medical advisory committees is being actively considered in the context of a range of other issues, including indemnity. (3)-(5) It is longstanding government policy to provide adequate ex gratia support to persons, whether employees or members of government boards or committees, including medical advisory committees, who become the subject of legal proceedings as a consequence of carrying out responsibilities of a public nature. This support is given provided that the relevant conduct was in good faith and reasonable and, of course, that the provision of indemnity is compatible with any relevant contractual or other arrangement with the person seeking indemnity. Each application is determined on its merits. There is no reason in principle that an application for indemnity by a chairman of a medical advisory committee would be treated by government any differently from an application by an ordinary member of such a committee. Officers from the Department of Health are not aware of any claim being made against a member of a medical advisory committee.
(5) If not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The issue of remuneration of chairs of country hospital medical advisory committees is being actively considered in the context of a range of other issues, including indemnity. (3)-(5) It is longstanding government policy to provide adequate ex gratia support to persons, whether employees or members of government boards or committees, including medical advisory committees, who become the subject of legal proceedings as a consequence of carrying out responsibilities of a public nature. This support is given provided that the relevant conduct was in good faith and reasonable and, of course, that the provision of indemnity is compatible with any relevant contractual or other arrangement with the person seeking indemnity. Each application is determined on its merits. There is no reason in principle that an application for indemnity by a chairman of a medical advisory committee would be treated by government any differently from an application by an ordinary member of such a committee. Officers from the Department of Health are not aware of any claim being made against a member of a medical advisory committee.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The issue of remuneration of chairs of country hospital medical advisory committees is being actively considered in the context of a range of other issues, including indemnity. (3)-(5) It is longstanding government policy to provide adequate ex gratia support to persons, whether employees or members of government boards or committees, including medical advisory committees, who become the subject of legal proceedings as a consequence of carrying out responsibilities of a public nature. This support is given provided that the relevant conduct was in good faith and reasonable and, of course, that the provision of indemnity is compatible with any relevant contractual or other arrangement with the person seeking indemnity. Each application is determined on its merits. There is no reason in principle that an application for indemnity by a chairman of a medical advisory committee would be treated by government any differently from an application by an ordinary member of such a committee. Officers from the Department of Health are not aware of any claim being made against a member of a medical advisory committee.
I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The issue of remuneration of chairs of country hospital medical advisory committees is being actively considered in the context of a range of other issues, including indemnity. (3)-(5) It is longstanding government policy to provide adequate ex gratia support to persons, whether employees or members of government boards or committees, including medical advisory committees, who become the subject of legal proceedings as a consequence of carrying out responsibilities of a public nature. This support is given provided that the relevant conduct was in good faith and reasonable and, of course, that the provision of indemnity is compatible with any relevant contractual or other arrangement with the person seeking indemnity. Each application is determined on its merits. There is no reason in principle that an application for indemnity by a chairman of a medical advisory committee would be treated by government any differently from an application by an ordinary member of such a committee. Officers from the Department of Health are not aware of any claim being made against a member of a medical advisory committee.
(1)-(2) The issue of remuneration of chairs of country hospital medical advisory committees is being actively considered in the context of a range of other issues, including indemnity. (3)-(5) It is longstanding government policy to provide adequate ex gratia support to persons, whether employees or members of government boards or committees, including medical advisory committees, who become the subject of legal proceedings as a consequence of carrying out responsibilities of a public nature. This support is given provided that the relevant conduct was in good faith and reasonable and, of course, that the provision of indemnity is compatible with any relevant contractual or other arrangement with the person seeking indemnity. Each application is determined on its merits. There is no reason in principle that an application for indemnity by a chairman of a medical advisory committee would be treated by government any differently from an application by an ordinary member of such a committee. Officers from the Department of Health are not aware of any claim being made against a member of a medical advisory committee.
(3)-(5) It is longstanding government policy to provide adequate ex gratia support to persons, whether employees or members of government boards or committees, including medical advisory committees, who become the subject of legal proceedings as a consequence of carrying out responsibilities of a public nature. This support is given provided that the relevant conduct was in good faith and reasonable and, of course, that the provision of indemnity is compatible with any relevant contractual or other arrangement with the person seeking indemnity. Each application is determined on its merits. There is no reason in principle that an application for indemnity by a chairman of a medical advisory committee would be treated by government any differently from an application by an ordinary member of such a committee. Officers from the Department of Health are not aware of any claim being made against a member of a medical advisory committee.
(1) Why has the modest remuneration for these duties not been revised since 1993? (2) When will it be reviewed? (3) Why are these people not indemnified by the Department of Health when other employees such as directors of nursing and medical directors, as well as general members of the medical advisory committees, are indemnified? (4) Will the Government take steps to correct this inequitable situation? (5) If not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The issue of remuneration of chairs of country hospital medical advisory committees is being actively considered in the context of a range of other issues, including indemnity. (3)-(5) It is longstanding government policy to provide adequate ex gratia support to persons, whether employees or members of government boards or committees, including medical advisory committees, who become the subject of legal proceedings as a consequence of carrying out responsibilities of a public nature. This support is given provided that the relevant conduct was in good faith and reasonable and, of course, that the provision of indemnity is compatible with any relevant contractual or other arrangement with the person seeking indemnity. Each application is determined on its merits. There is no reason in principle that an application for indemnity by a chairman of a medical advisory committee would be treated by government any differently from an application by an ordinary member of such a committee. Officers from the Department of Health are not aware of any claim being made against a member of a medical advisory committee.
(2) When will it be reviewed? (3) Why are these people not indemnified by the Department of Health when other employees such as directors of nursing and medical directors, as well as general members of the medical advisory committees, are indemnified? (4) Will the Government take steps to correct this inequitable situation? (5) If not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The issue of remuneration of chairs of country hospital medical advisory committees is being actively considered in the context of a range of other issues, including indemnity. (3)-(5) It is longstanding government policy to provide adequate ex gratia support to persons, whether employees or members of government boards or committees, including medical advisory committees, who become the subject of legal proceedings as a consequence of carrying out responsibilities of a public nature. This support is given provided that the relevant conduct was in good faith and reasonable and, of course, that the provision of indemnity is compatible with any relevant contractual or other arrangement with the person seeking indemnity. Each application is determined on its merits. There is no reason in principle that an application for indemnity by a chairman of a medical advisory committee would be treated by government any differently from an application by an ordinary member of such a committee. Officers from the Department of Health are not aware of any claim being made against a member of a medical advisory committee.
(3) Why are these people not indemnified by the Department of Health when other employees such as directors of nursing and medical directors, as well as general members of the medical advisory committees, are indemnified? (4) Will the Government take steps to correct this inequitable situation? (5) If not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The issue of remuneration of chairs of country hospital medical advisory committees is being actively considered in the context of a range of other issues, including indemnity. (3)-(5) It is longstanding government policy to provide adequate ex gratia support to persons, whether employees or members of government boards or committees, including medical advisory committees, who become the subject of legal proceedings as a consequence of carrying out responsibilities of a public nature. This support is given provided that the relevant conduct was in good faith and reasonable and, of course, that the provision of indemnity is compatible with any relevant contractual or other arrangement with the person seeking indemnity. Each application is determined on its merits. There is no reason in principle that an application for indemnity by a chairman of a medical advisory committee would be treated by government any differently from an application by an ordinary member of such a committee. Officers from the Department of Health are not aware of any claim being made against a member of a medical advisory committee.
(4) Will the Government take steps to correct this inequitable situation? (5) If not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The issue of remuneration of chairs of country hospital medical advisory committees is being actively considered in the context of a range of other issues, including indemnity. (3)-(5) It is longstanding government policy to provide adequate ex gratia support to persons, whether employees or members of government boards or committees, including medical advisory committees, who become the subject of legal proceedings as a consequence of carrying out responsibilities of a public nature. This support is given provided that the relevant conduct was in good faith and reasonable and, of course, that the provision of indemnity is compatible with any relevant contractual or other arrangement with the person seeking indemnity. Each application is determined on its merits. There is no reason in principle that an application for indemnity by a chairman of a medical advisory committee would be treated by government any differently from an application by an ordinary member of such a committee. Officers from the Department of Health are not aware of any claim being made against a member of a medical advisory committee.
(5) If not, why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The issue of remuneration of chairs of country hospital medical advisory committees is being actively considered in the context of a range of other issues, including indemnity. (3)-(5) It is longstanding government policy to provide adequate ex gratia support to persons, whether employees or members of government boards or committees, including medical advisory committees, who become the subject of legal proceedings as a consequence of carrying out responsibilities of a public nature. This support is given provided that the relevant conduct was in good faith and reasonable and, of course, that the provision of indemnity is compatible with any relevant contractual or other arrangement with the person seeking indemnity. Each application is determined on its merits. There is no reason in principle that an application for indemnity by a chairman of a medical advisory committee would be treated by government any differently from an application by an ordinary member of such a committee. Officers from the Department of Health are not aware of any claim being made against a member of a medical advisory committee.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The issue of remuneration of chairs of country hospital medical advisory committees is being actively considered in the context of a range of other issues, including indemnity. (3)-(5) It is longstanding government policy to provide adequate ex gratia support to persons, whether employees or members of government boards or committees, including medical advisory committees, who become the subject of legal proceedings as a consequence of carrying out responsibilities of a public nature. This support is given provided that the relevant conduct was in good faith and reasonable and, of course, that the provision of indemnity is compatible with any relevant contractual or other arrangement with the person seeking indemnity. Each application is determined on its merits. There is no reason in principle that an application for indemnity by a chairman of a medical advisory committee would be treated by government any differently from an application by an ordinary member of such a committee. Officers from the Department of Health are not aware of any claim being made against a member of a medical advisory committee.
I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. (1)-(2) The issue of remuneration of chairs of country hospital medical advisory committees is being actively considered in the context of a range of other issues, including indemnity. (3)-(5) It is longstanding government policy to provide adequate ex gratia support to persons, whether employees or members of government boards or committees, including medical advisory committees, who become the subject of legal proceedings as a consequence of carrying out responsibilities of a public nature. This support is given provided that the relevant conduct was in good faith and reasonable and, of course, that the provision of indemnity is compatible with any relevant contractual or other arrangement with the person seeking indemnity. Each application is determined on its merits. There is no reason in principle that an application for indemnity by a chairman of a medical advisory committee would be treated by government any differently from an application by an ordinary member of such a committee. Officers from the Department of Health are not aware of any claim being made against a member of a medical advisory committee.
(1)-(2) The issue of remuneration of chairs of country hospital medical advisory committees is being actively considered in the context of a range of other issues, including indemnity. (3)-(5) It is longstanding government policy to provide adequate ex gratia support to persons, whether employees or members of government boards or committees, including medical advisory committees, who become the subject of legal proceedings as a consequence of carrying out responsibilities of a public nature. This support is given provided that the relevant conduct was in good faith and reasonable and, of course, that the provision of indemnity is compatible with any relevant contractual or other arrangement with the person seeking indemnity. Each application is determined on its merits. There is no reason in principle that an application for indemnity by a chairman of a medical advisory committee would be treated by government any differently from an application by an ordinary member of such a committee. Officers from the Department of Health are not aware of any claim being made against a member of a medical advisory committee.
(3)-(5) It is longstanding government policy to provide adequate ex gratia support to persons, whether employees or members of government boards or committees, including medical advisory committees, who become the subject of legal proceedings as a consequence of carrying out responsibilities of a public nature. This support is given provided that the relevant conduct was in good faith and reasonable and, of course, that the provision of indemnity is compatible with any relevant contractual or other arrangement with the person seeking indemnity. Each application is determined on its merits. There is no reason in principle that an application for indemnity by a chairman of a medical advisory committee would be treated by government any differently from an application by an ordinary member of such a committee. Officers from the Department of Health are not aware of any claim being made against a member of a medical advisory committee.
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.