❓ Ms Radisich asks about claims of elective surgery grinding to a halt due to emergency patient influx. Mr McGinty refutes the claim, providing statistics on operations performed and cancellations, criticising the media report and apologising to those whose surgeries were deferred.
AnsweredQoN 467Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to claims published in The West Australian this morning that elective surgery has ground to a virtual halt at major hospitals while the system copes with a big influx of emergency patients. Will the minister provide an accurate picture of the situation for elective surgery this week? Mr J.A. McGINTY
AnswerView source ↗
This morning while I was having my breakfast, I nearly choked on my Weeties when I read this story in The West Australian under the heading “Packed hospitals cut surgery”. I thought that was fair enough, and then I went on to read the first paragraph, which reads - Elective surgery has ground to a virtual halt at major hospitals while the system copes with a big influx of emergency patients, according to the Australian Medical Association. It is so wrong as to be funny. I appreciate starting the day with a bit of humour, but this one really took the cake. I will inform the House of the correct situation. In the past two days - that is, Monday and Tuesday of this week - 678 operations were performed in metropolitan hospitals. Having ground to a virtual halt, we still managed to get 678 operations performed. Twenty-six operations were cancelled; that is, 3.8 per cent. If that is elective surgery virtually grinding to a halt, then we might as well all pack up and go home. In the hospital system, emergencies will always take priority. I thought that was commonsense. That is exactly how it should be. At the same time we are trying to ensure that as many people as possible receive the elective surgery they have been waiting for. There will occasionally be times like this when, because of unprecedented demand, the balance will tip one way or the other. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: It is not unprecedented. It always happens at this time of the year. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It does not. Our emergency departments this year have coped superbly. Last winter, during the months of May, June, July and August, there were 50 triple diversions. This year there have been three. That is an indicator of how well our doctors and nurses in the frontline are performing this year. I will just repeat the circumstances of how our system has supposedly ground to halt. In the past two days 678 operations have been performed, with 26 cancellations, which is a 3.8 per cent cancellation rate. To those 26 people who have had to have their operations deferred, I say that the Government will reschedule those operations within the next few weeks, and I apologise to them for the inconvenience. It was necessary so that we could extend emergency services to people who need them on an unscheduled basis. I will come back to the article in The West Australian . I have two expectations of the media. The first is that they will get their facts right. I do not think that is an unreasonable expectation, but unfortunately it has not occurred on this occasion. Secondly, I expect that, if an adverse article is written, the person against whom the article has been written has the chance to put the other side of the story. Neither I nor my press officer was contacted by The West Australian and asked to comment on this. Unfortunately, we have failed on both of those fundamental principles of journalism. As members will be aware, the Premier was asked on Paul Murray’s 6PR radio program about the issue of our relationship with The West Australian . The Premier made the point that he did not believe there was any anti-government bias, and I share that view. There is, however, a Fleet Street style of journalism that focuses on the negatives and gross exaggeration and that is designed for one purpose; that is, to boost circulation. I think that is a fairly accurate description of what might be seen in some quarters as a difficulty that the Government has encountered. When I read stories like this about how the system is supposedly grinding to a halt, yet we are still doing more than 600 operations, I at least think that something is not quite right in the message being conveyed. Unfortunately, as often happens in health-related matters, these things become contagious. It is a bit like a disease. We find that this sort of style spreads. Mr R.F. Johnson: What have you got to say to those 26 people, minister? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I have already said it; the member was not listening. I have already said I am sorry their operations were deferred and they will be rescheduled within weeks. That has already been done in some cases. I want to say this in respect of our national broadcaster. It was running an article on its radio program this morning. This is very unfortunate for an organisation that should pride itself on accuracy. Mr A.J. Carpenter: They have lost all their quality. Mr J.A. McGINTY: This morning ABC radio was running a line accusing the Government of operating an unofficial bypass system in its emergency departments to make the figures look better. That is a very serious allegation, because implicit in it is that safety is being put at risk to make the Government look good. It is a very serious allegation, and I would have expected the ABC - as I did with The West Australian - to have tried to ascertain the truth of the matter. The fact is that it was a complete fabrication and one that should never have been put to air. There were no facts or evidence to support the claim. I would like to inform the House what the facts are. Yesterday in the Legislative Council an answer was provided about the number of many occasions on which the state health emergency director had refused to grant a bypass. There were 11 requests made - Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: This morning while I was having my breakfast, I nearly choked on my Weeties when I read this story in The West Australian under the heading “Packed hospitals cut surgery”. I thought that was fair enough, and then I went on to read the first paragraph, which reads - Elective surgery has ground to a virtual halt at major hospitals while the system copes with a big influx of emergency patients, according to the Australian Medical Association. It is so wrong as to be funny. I appreciate starting the day with a bit of humour, but this one really took the cake. I will inform the House of the correct situation. In the past two days - that is, Monday and Tuesday of this week - 678 operations were performed in metropolitan hospitals. Having ground to a virtual halt, we still managed to get 678 operations performed. Twenty-six operations were cancelled; that is, 3.8 per cent. If that is elective surgery virtually grinding to a halt, then we might as well all pack up and go home. In the hospital system, emergencies will always take priority. I thought that was commonsense. That is exactly how it should be. At the same time we are trying to ensure that as many people as possible receive the elective surgery they have been waiting for. There will occasionally be times like this when, because of unprecedented demand, the balance will tip one way or the other. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: It is not unprecedented. It always happens at this time of the year. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It does not. Our emergency departments this year have coped superbly. Last winter, during the months of May, June, July and August, there were 50 triple diversions. This year there have been three. That is an indicator of how well our doctors and nurses in the frontline are performing this year. I will just repeat the circumstances of how our system has supposedly ground to halt. In the past two days 678 operations have been performed, with 26 cancellations, which is a 3.8 per cent cancellation rate. To those 26 people who have had to have their operations deferred, I say that the Government will reschedule those operations within the next few weeks, and I apologise to them for the inconvenience. It was necessary so that we could extend emergency services to people who need them on an unscheduled basis. I will come back to the article in The West Australian . I have two expectations of the media. The first is that they will get their facts right. I do not think that is an unreasonable expectation, but unfortunately it has not occurred on this occasion. Secondly, I expect that, if an adverse article is written, the person against whom the article has been written has the chance to put the other side of the story. Neither I nor my press officer was contacted by The West Australian and asked to comment on this. Unfortunately, we have failed on both of those fundamental principles of journalism. As members will be aware, the Premier was asked on Paul Murray’s 6PR radio program about the issue of our relationship with The West Australian . The Premier made the point that he did not believe there was any anti-government bias, and I share that view. There is, however, a Fleet Street style of journalism that focuses on the negatives and gross exaggeration and that is designed for one purpose; that is, to boost circulation. I think that is a fairly accurate description of what might be seen in some quarters as a difficulty that the Government has encountered. When I read stories like this about how the system is supposedly grinding to a halt, yet we are still doing more than 600 operations, I at least think that something is not quite right in the message being conveyed. Unfortunately, as often happens in health-related matters, these things become contagious. It is a bit like a disease. We find that this sort of style spreads. Mr R.F. Johnson: What have you got to say to those 26 people, minister? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I have already said it; the member was not listening. I have already said I am sorry their operations were deferred and they will be rescheduled within weeks. That has already been done in some cases. I want to say this in respect of our national broadcaster. It was running an article on its radio program this morning. This is very unfortunate for an organisation that should pride itself on accuracy. Mr A.J. Carpenter: They have lost all their quality. Mr J.A. McGINTY: This morning ABC radio was running a line accusing the Government of operating an unofficial bypass system in its emergency departments to make the figures look better. That is a very serious allegation, because implicit in it is that safety is being put at risk to make the Government look good. It is a very serious allegation, and I would have expected the ABC - as I did with The West Australian - to have tried to ascertain the truth of the matter. The fact is that it was a complete fabrication and one that should never have been put to air. There were no facts or evidence to support the claim. I would like to inform the House what the facts are. Yesterday in the Legislative Council an answer was provided about the number of many occasions on which the state health emergency director had refused to grant a bypass. There were 11 requests made - Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
This morning while I was having my breakfast, I nearly choked on my Weeties when I read this story in The West Australian under the heading “Packed hospitals cut surgery”. I thought that was fair enough, and then I went on to read the first paragraph, which reads - Elective surgery has ground to a virtual halt at major hospitals while the system copes with a big influx of emergency patients, according to the Australian Medical Association. It is so wrong as to be funny. I appreciate starting the day with a bit of humour, but this one really took the cake. I will inform the House of the correct situation. In the past two days - that is, Monday and Tuesday of this week - 678 operations were performed in metropolitan hospitals. Having ground to a virtual halt, we still managed to get 678 operations performed. Twenty-six operations were cancelled; that is, 3.8 per cent. If that is elective surgery virtually grinding to a halt, then we might as well all pack up and go home. In the hospital system, emergencies will always take priority. I thought that was commonsense. That is exactly how it should be. At the same time we are trying to ensure that as many people as possible receive the elective surgery they have been waiting for. There will occasionally be times like this when, because of unprecedented demand, the balance will tip one way or the other. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: It is not unprecedented. It always happens at this time of the year. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It does not. Our emergency departments this year have coped superbly. Last winter, during the months of May, June, July and August, there were 50 triple diversions. This year there have been three. That is an indicator of how well our doctors and nurses in the frontline are performing this year. I will just repeat the circumstances of how our system has supposedly ground to halt. In the past two days 678 operations have been performed, with 26 cancellations, which is a 3.8 per cent cancellation rate. To those 26 people who have had to have their operations deferred, I say that the Government will reschedule those operations within the next few weeks, and I apologise to them for the inconvenience. It was necessary so that we could extend emergency services to people who need them on an unscheduled basis. I will come back to the article in The West Australian . I have two expectations of the media. The first is that they will get their facts right. I do not think that is an unreasonable expectation, but unfortunately it has not occurred on this occasion. Secondly, I expect that, if an adverse article is written, the person against whom the article has been written has the chance to put the other side of the story. Neither I nor my press officer was contacted by The West Australian and asked to comment on this. Unfortunately, we have failed on both of those fundamental principles of journalism. As members will be aware, the Premier was asked on Paul Murray’s 6PR radio program about the issue of our relationship with The West Australian . The Premier made the point that he did not believe there was any anti-government bias, and I share that view. There is, however, a Fleet Street style of journalism that focuses on the negatives and gross exaggeration and that is designed for one purpose; that is, to boost circulation. I think that is a fairly accurate description of what might be seen in some quarters as a difficulty that the Government has encountered. When I read stories like this about how the system is supposedly grinding to a halt, yet we are still doing more than 600 operations, I at least think that something is not quite right in the message being conveyed. Unfortunately, as often happens in health-related matters, these things become contagious. It is a bit like a disease. We find that this sort of style spreads. Mr R.F. Johnson: What have you got to say to those 26 people, minister? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I have already said it; the member was not listening. I have already said I am sorry their operations were deferred and they will be rescheduled within weeks. That has already been done in some cases. I want to say this in respect of our national broadcaster. It was running an article on its radio program this morning. This is very unfortunate for an organisation that should pride itself on accuracy. Mr A.J. Carpenter: They have lost all their quality. Mr J.A. McGINTY: This morning ABC radio was running a line accusing the Government of operating an unofficial bypass system in its emergency departments to make the figures look better. That is a very serious allegation, because implicit in it is that safety is being put at risk to make the Government look good. It is a very serious allegation, and I would have expected the ABC - as I did with The West Australian - to have tried to ascertain the truth of the matter. The fact is that it was a complete fabrication and one that should never have been put to air. There were no facts or evidence to support the claim. I would like to inform the House what the facts are. Yesterday in the Legislative Council an answer was provided about the number of many occasions on which the state health emergency director had refused to grant a bypass. There were 11 requests made - Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: It is not unprecedented. It always happens at this time of the year. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It does not. Our emergency departments this year have coped superbly. Last winter, during the months of May, June, July and August, there were 50 triple diversions. This year there have been three. That is an indicator of how well our doctors and nurses in the frontline are performing this year. I will just repeat the circumstances of how our system has supposedly ground to halt. In the past two days 678 operations have been performed, with 26 cancellations, which is a 3.8 per cent cancellation rate. To those 26 people who have had to have their operations deferred, I say that the Government will reschedule those operations within the next few weeks, and I apologise to them for the inconvenience. It was necessary so that we could extend emergency services to people who need them on an unscheduled basis. I will come back to the article in The West Australian . I have two expectations of the media. The first is that they will get their facts right. I do not think that is an unreasonable expectation, but unfortunately it has not occurred on this occasion. Secondly, I expect that, if an adverse article is written, the person against whom the article has been written has the chance to put the other side of the story. Neither I nor my press officer was contacted by The West Australian and asked to comment on this. Unfortunately, we have failed on both of those fundamental principles of journalism. As members will be aware, the Premier was asked on Paul Murray’s 6PR radio program about the issue of our relationship with The West Australian . The Premier made the point that he did not believe there was any anti-government bias, and I share that view. There is, however, a Fleet Street style of journalism that focuses on the negatives and gross exaggeration and that is designed for one purpose; that is, to boost circulation. I think that is a fairly accurate description of what might be seen in some quarters as a difficulty that the Government has encountered. When I read stories like this about how the system is supposedly grinding to a halt, yet we are still doing more than 600 operations, I at least think that something is not quite right in the message being conveyed. Unfortunately, as often happens in health-related matters, these things become contagious. It is a bit like a disease. We find that this sort of style spreads. Mr R.F. Johnson: What have you got to say to those 26 people, minister? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I have already said it; the member was not listening. I have already said I am sorry their operations were deferred and they will be rescheduled within weeks. That has already been done in some cases. I want to say this in respect of our national broadcaster. It was running an article on its radio program this morning. This is very unfortunate for an organisation that should pride itself on accuracy. Mr A.J. Carpenter: They have lost all their quality. Mr J.A. McGINTY: This morning ABC radio was running a line accusing the Government of operating an unofficial bypass system in its emergency departments to make the figures look better. That is a very serious allegation, because implicit in it is that safety is being put at risk to make the Government look good. It is a very serious allegation, and I would have expected the ABC - as I did with The West Australian - to have tried to ascertain the truth of the matter. The fact is that it was a complete fabrication and one that should never have been put to air. There were no facts or evidence to support the claim. I would like to inform the House what the facts are. Yesterday in the Legislative Council an answer was provided about the number of many occasions on which the state health emergency director had refused to grant a bypass. There were 11 requests made - Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
Mr J.A. McGINTY: It does not. Our emergency departments this year have coped superbly. Last winter, during the months of May, June, July and August, there were 50 triple diversions. This year there have been three. That is an indicator of how well our doctors and nurses in the frontline are performing this year. I will just repeat the circumstances of how our system has supposedly ground to halt. In the past two days 678 operations have been performed, with 26 cancellations, which is a 3.8 per cent cancellation rate. To those 26 people who have had to have their operations deferred, I say that the Government will reschedule those operations within the next few weeks, and I apologise to them for the inconvenience. It was necessary so that we could extend emergency services to people who need them on an unscheduled basis. I will come back to the article in The West Australian . I have two expectations of the media. The first is that they will get their facts right. I do not think that is an unreasonable expectation, but unfortunately it has not occurred on this occasion. Secondly, I expect that, if an adverse article is written, the person against whom the article has been written has the chance to put the other side of the story. Neither I nor my press officer was contacted by The West Australian and asked to comment on this. Unfortunately, we have failed on both of those fundamental principles of journalism. As members will be aware, the Premier was asked on Paul Murray’s 6PR radio program about the issue of our relationship with The West Australian . The Premier made the point that he did not believe there was any anti-government bias, and I share that view. There is, however, a Fleet Street style of journalism that focuses on the negatives and gross exaggeration and that is designed for one purpose; that is, to boost circulation. I think that is a fairly accurate description of what might be seen in some quarters as a difficulty that the Government has encountered. When I read stories like this about how the system is supposedly grinding to a halt, yet we are still doing more than 600 operations, I at least think that something is not quite right in the message being conveyed. Unfortunately, as often happens in health-related matters, these things become contagious. It is a bit like a disease. We find that this sort of style spreads. Mr R.F. Johnson: What have you got to say to those 26 people, minister? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I have already said it; the member was not listening. I have already said I am sorry their operations were deferred and they will be rescheduled within weeks. That has already been done in some cases. I want to say this in respect of our national broadcaster. It was running an article on its radio program this morning. This is very unfortunate for an organisation that should pride itself on accuracy. Mr A.J. Carpenter: They have lost all their quality. Mr J.A. McGINTY: This morning ABC radio was running a line accusing the Government of operating an unofficial bypass system in its emergency departments to make the figures look better. That is a very serious allegation, because implicit in it is that safety is being put at risk to make the Government look good. It is a very serious allegation, and I would have expected the ABC - as I did with The West Australian - to have tried to ascertain the truth of the matter. The fact is that it was a complete fabrication and one that should never have been put to air. There were no facts or evidence to support the claim. I would like to inform the House what the facts are. Yesterday in the Legislative Council an answer was provided about the number of many occasions on which the state health emergency director had refused to grant a bypass. There were 11 requests made - Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
I will come back to the article in The West Australian . I have two expectations of the media. The first is that they will get their facts right. I do not think that is an unreasonable expectation, but unfortunately it has not occurred on this occasion. Secondly, I expect that, if an adverse article is written, the person against whom the article has been written has the chance to put the other side of the story. Neither I nor my press officer was contacted by The West Australian and asked to comment on this. Unfortunately, we have failed on both of those fundamental principles of journalism. As members will be aware, the Premier was asked on Paul Murray’s 6PR radio program about the issue of our relationship with The West Australian . The Premier made the point that he did not believe there was any anti-government bias, and I share that view. There is, however, a Fleet Street style of journalism that focuses on the negatives and gross exaggeration and that is designed for one purpose; that is, to boost circulation. I think that is a fairly accurate description of what might be seen in some quarters as a difficulty that the Government has encountered. When I read stories like this about how the system is supposedly grinding to a halt, yet we are still doing more than 600 operations, I at least think that something is not quite right in the message being conveyed. Unfortunately, as often happens in health-related matters, these things become contagious. It is a bit like a disease. We find that this sort of style spreads. Mr R.F. Johnson: What have you got to say to those 26 people, minister? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I have already said it; the member was not listening. I have already said I am sorry their operations were deferred and they will be rescheduled within weeks. That has already been done in some cases. I want to say this in respect of our national broadcaster. It was running an article on its radio program this morning. This is very unfortunate for an organisation that should pride itself on accuracy. Mr A.J. Carpenter: They have lost all their quality. Mr J.A. McGINTY: This morning ABC radio was running a line accusing the Government of operating an unofficial bypass system in its emergency departments to make the figures look better. That is a very serious allegation, because implicit in it is that safety is being put at risk to make the Government look good. It is a very serious allegation, and I would have expected the ABC - as I did with The West Australian - to have tried to ascertain the truth of the matter. The fact is that it was a complete fabrication and one that should never have been put to air. There were no facts or evidence to support the claim. I would like to inform the House what the facts are. Yesterday in the Legislative Council an answer was provided about the number of many occasions on which the state health emergency director had refused to grant a bypass. There were 11 requests made - Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
Mr R.F. Johnson: What have you got to say to those 26 people, minister? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I have already said it; the member was not listening. I have already said I am sorry their operations were deferred and they will be rescheduled within weeks. That has already been done in some cases. I want to say this in respect of our national broadcaster. It was running an article on its radio program this morning. This is very unfortunate for an organisation that should pride itself on accuracy. Mr A.J. Carpenter: They have lost all their quality. Mr J.A. McGINTY: This morning ABC radio was running a line accusing the Government of operating an unofficial bypass system in its emergency departments to make the figures look better. That is a very serious allegation, because implicit in it is that safety is being put at risk to make the Government look good. It is a very serious allegation, and I would have expected the ABC - as I did with The West Australian - to have tried to ascertain the truth of the matter. The fact is that it was a complete fabrication and one that should never have been put to air. There were no facts or evidence to support the claim. I would like to inform the House what the facts are. Yesterday in the Legislative Council an answer was provided about the number of many occasions on which the state health emergency director had refused to grant a bypass. There were 11 requests made - Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I have already said it; the member was not listening. I have already said I am sorry their operations were deferred and they will be rescheduled within weeks. That has already been done in some cases. I want to say this in respect of our national broadcaster. It was running an article on its radio program this morning. This is very unfortunate for an organisation that should pride itself on accuracy. Mr A.J. Carpenter: They have lost all their quality. Mr J.A. McGINTY: This morning ABC radio was running a line accusing the Government of operating an unofficial bypass system in its emergency departments to make the figures look better. That is a very serious allegation, because implicit in it is that safety is being put at risk to make the Government look good. It is a very serious allegation, and I would have expected the ABC - as I did with The West Australian - to have tried to ascertain the truth of the matter. The fact is that it was a complete fabrication and one that should never have been put to air. There were no facts or evidence to support the claim. I would like to inform the House what the facts are. Yesterday in the Legislative Council an answer was provided about the number of many occasions on which the state health emergency director had refused to grant a bypass. There were 11 requests made - Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
Mr A.J. Carpenter: They have lost all their quality. Mr J.A. McGINTY: This morning ABC radio was running a line accusing the Government of operating an unofficial bypass system in its emergency departments to make the figures look better. That is a very serious allegation, because implicit in it is that safety is being put at risk to make the Government look good. It is a very serious allegation, and I would have expected the ABC - as I did with The West Australian - to have tried to ascertain the truth of the matter. The fact is that it was a complete fabrication and one that should never have been put to air. There were no facts or evidence to support the claim. I would like to inform the House what the facts are. Yesterday in the Legislative Council an answer was provided about the number of many occasions on which the state health emergency director had refused to grant a bypass. There were 11 requests made - Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
Mr J.A. McGINTY: This morning ABC radio was running a line accusing the Government of operating an unofficial bypass system in its emergency departments to make the figures look better. That is a very serious allegation, because implicit in it is that safety is being put at risk to make the Government look good. It is a very serious allegation, and I would have expected the ABC - as I did with The West Australian - to have tried to ascertain the truth of the matter. The fact is that it was a complete fabrication and one that should never have been put to air. There were no facts or evidence to support the claim. I would like to inform the House what the facts are. Yesterday in the Legislative Council an answer was provided about the number of many occasions on which the state health emergency director had refused to grant a bypass. There were 11 requests made - Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent.
SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent.
And that’s true, to an extent.
[See paper No 2684.]
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: This morning while I was having my breakfast, I nearly choked on my Weeties when I read this story in The West Australian under the heading “Packed hospitals cut surgery”. I thought that was fair enough, and then I went on to read the first paragraph, which reads - Elective surgery has ground to a virtual halt at major hospitals while the system copes with a big influx of emergency patients, according to the Australian Medical Association. It is so wrong as to be funny. I appreciate starting the day with a bit of humour, but this one really took the cake. I will inform the House of the correct situation. In the past two days - that is, Monday and Tuesday of this week - 678 operations were performed in metropolitan hospitals. Having ground to a virtual halt, we still managed to get 678 operations performed. Twenty-six operations were cancelled; that is, 3.8 per cent. If that is elective surgery virtually grinding to a halt, then we might as well all pack up and go home. In the hospital system, emergencies will always take priority. I thought that was commonsense. That is exactly how it should be. At the same time we are trying to ensure that as many people as possible receive the elective surgery they have been waiting for. There will occasionally be times like this when, because of unprecedented demand, the balance will tip one way or the other. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: It is not unprecedented. It always happens at this time of the year. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It does not. Our emergency departments this year have coped superbly. Last winter, during the months of May, June, July and August, there were 50 triple diversions. This year there have been three. That is an indicator of how well our doctors and nurses in the frontline are performing this year. I will just repeat the circumstances of how our system has supposedly ground to halt. In the past two days 678 operations have been performed, with 26 cancellations, which is a 3.8 per cent cancellation rate. To those 26 people who have had to have their operations deferred, I say that the Government will reschedule those operations within the next few weeks, and I apologise to them for the inconvenience. It was necessary so that we could extend emergency services to people who need them on an unscheduled basis. I will come back to the article in The West Australian . I have two expectations of the media. The first is that they will get their facts right. I do not think that is an unreasonable expectation, but unfortunately it has not occurred on this occasion. Secondly, I expect that, if an adverse article is written, the person against whom the article has been written has the chance to put the other side of the story. Neither I nor my press officer was contacted by The West Australian and asked to comment on this. Unfortunately, we have failed on both of those fundamental principles of journalism. As members will be aware, the Premier was asked on Paul Murray’s 6PR radio program about the issue of our relationship with The West Australian . The Premier made the point that he did not believe there was any anti-government bias, and I share that view. There is, however, a Fleet Street style of journalism that focuses on the negatives and gross exaggeration and that is designed for one purpose; that is, to boost circulation. I think that is a fairly accurate description of what might be seen in some quarters as a difficulty that the Government has encountered. When I read stories like this about how the system is supposedly grinding to a halt, yet we are still doing more than 600 operations, I at least think that something is not quite right in the message being conveyed. Unfortunately, as often happens in health-related matters, these things become contagious. It is a bit like a disease. We find that this sort of style spreads. Mr R.F. Johnson: What have you got to say to those 26 people, minister? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I have already said it; the member was not listening. I have already said I am sorry their operations were deferred and they will be rescheduled within weeks. That has already been done in some cases. I want to say this in respect of our national broadcaster. It was running an article on its radio program this morning. This is very unfortunate for an organisation that should pride itself on accuracy. Mr A.J. Carpenter: They have lost all their quality. Mr J.A. McGINTY: This morning ABC radio was running a line accusing the Government of operating an unofficial bypass system in its emergency departments to make the figures look better. That is a very serious allegation, because implicit in it is that safety is being put at risk to make the Government look good. It is a very serious allegation, and I would have expected the ABC - as I did with The West Australian - to have tried to ascertain the truth of the matter. The fact is that it was a complete fabrication and one that should never have been put to air. There were no facts or evidence to support the claim. I would like to inform the House what the facts are. Yesterday in the Legislative Council an answer was provided about the number of many occasions on which the state health emergency director had refused to grant a bypass. There were 11 requests made - Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
This morning while I was having my breakfast, I nearly choked on my Weeties when I read this story in The West Australian under the heading “Packed hospitals cut surgery”. I thought that was fair enough, and then I went on to read the first paragraph, which reads - Elective surgery has ground to a virtual halt at major hospitals while the system copes with a big influx of emergency patients, according to the Australian Medical Association. It is so wrong as to be funny. I appreciate starting the day with a bit of humour, but this one really took the cake. I will inform the House of the correct situation. In the past two days - that is, Monday and Tuesday of this week - 678 operations were performed in metropolitan hospitals. Having ground to a virtual halt, we still managed to get 678 operations performed. Twenty-six operations were cancelled; that is, 3.8 per cent. If that is elective surgery virtually grinding to a halt, then we might as well all pack up and go home. In the hospital system, emergencies will always take priority. I thought that was commonsense. That is exactly how it should be. At the same time we are trying to ensure that as many people as possible receive the elective surgery they have been waiting for. There will occasionally be times like this when, because of unprecedented demand, the balance will tip one way or the other. Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: It is not unprecedented. It always happens at this time of the year. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It does not. Our emergency departments this year have coped superbly. Last winter, during the months of May, June, July and August, there were 50 triple diversions. This year there have been three. That is an indicator of how well our doctors and nurses in the frontline are performing this year. I will just repeat the circumstances of how our system has supposedly ground to halt. In the past two days 678 operations have been performed, with 26 cancellations, which is a 3.8 per cent cancellation rate. To those 26 people who have had to have their operations deferred, I say that the Government will reschedule those operations within the next few weeks, and I apologise to them for the inconvenience. It was necessary so that we could extend emergency services to people who need them on an unscheduled basis. I will come back to the article in The West Australian . I have two expectations of the media. The first is that they will get their facts right. I do not think that is an unreasonable expectation, but unfortunately it has not occurred on this occasion. Secondly, I expect that, if an adverse article is written, the person against whom the article has been written has the chance to put the other side of the story. Neither I nor my press officer was contacted by The West Australian and asked to comment on this. Unfortunately, we have failed on both of those fundamental principles of journalism. As members will be aware, the Premier was asked on Paul Murray’s 6PR radio program about the issue of our relationship with The West Australian . The Premier made the point that he did not believe there was any anti-government bias, and I share that view. There is, however, a Fleet Street style of journalism that focuses on the negatives and gross exaggeration and that is designed for one purpose; that is, to boost circulation. I think that is a fairly accurate description of what might be seen in some quarters as a difficulty that the Government has encountered. When I read stories like this about how the system is supposedly grinding to a halt, yet we are still doing more than 600 operations, I at least think that something is not quite right in the message being conveyed. Unfortunately, as often happens in health-related matters, these things become contagious. It is a bit like a disease. We find that this sort of style spreads. Mr R.F. Johnson: What have you got to say to those 26 people, minister? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I have already said it; the member was not listening. I have already said I am sorry their operations were deferred and they will be rescheduled within weeks. That has already been done in some cases. I want to say this in respect of our national broadcaster. It was running an article on its radio program this morning. This is very unfortunate for an organisation that should pride itself on accuracy. Mr A.J. Carpenter: They have lost all their quality. Mr J.A. McGINTY: This morning ABC radio was running a line accusing the Government of operating an unofficial bypass system in its emergency departments to make the figures look better. That is a very serious allegation, because implicit in it is that safety is being put at risk to make the Government look good. It is a very serious allegation, and I would have expected the ABC - as I did with The West Australian - to have tried to ascertain the truth of the matter. The fact is that it was a complete fabrication and one that should never have been put to air. There were no facts or evidence to support the claim. I would like to inform the House what the facts are. Yesterday in the Legislative Council an answer was provided about the number of many occasions on which the state health emergency director had refused to grant a bypass. There were 11 requests made - Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan: It is not unprecedented. It always happens at this time of the year. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It does not. Our emergency departments this year have coped superbly. Last winter, during the months of May, June, July and August, there were 50 triple diversions. This year there have been three. That is an indicator of how well our doctors and nurses in the frontline are performing this year. I will just repeat the circumstances of how our system has supposedly ground to halt. In the past two days 678 operations have been performed, with 26 cancellations, which is a 3.8 per cent cancellation rate. To those 26 people who have had to have their operations deferred, I say that the Government will reschedule those operations within the next few weeks, and I apologise to them for the inconvenience. It was necessary so that we could extend emergency services to people who need them on an unscheduled basis. I will come back to the article in The West Australian . I have two expectations of the media. The first is that they will get their facts right. I do not think that is an unreasonable expectation, but unfortunately it has not occurred on this occasion. Secondly, I expect that, if an adverse article is written, the person against whom the article has been written has the chance to put the other side of the story. Neither I nor my press officer was contacted by The West Australian and asked to comment on this. Unfortunately, we have failed on both of those fundamental principles of journalism. As members will be aware, the Premier was asked on Paul Murray’s 6PR radio program about the issue of our relationship with The West Australian . The Premier made the point that he did not believe there was any anti-government bias, and I share that view. There is, however, a Fleet Street style of journalism that focuses on the negatives and gross exaggeration and that is designed for one purpose; that is, to boost circulation. I think that is a fairly accurate description of what might be seen in some quarters as a difficulty that the Government has encountered. When I read stories like this about how the system is supposedly grinding to a halt, yet we are still doing more than 600 operations, I at least think that something is not quite right in the message being conveyed. Unfortunately, as often happens in health-related matters, these things become contagious. It is a bit like a disease. We find that this sort of style spreads. Mr R.F. Johnson: What have you got to say to those 26 people, minister? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I have already said it; the member was not listening. I have already said I am sorry their operations were deferred and they will be rescheduled within weeks. That has already been done in some cases. I want to say this in respect of our national broadcaster. It was running an article on its radio program this morning. This is very unfortunate for an organisation that should pride itself on accuracy. Mr A.J. Carpenter: They have lost all their quality. Mr J.A. McGINTY: This morning ABC radio was running a line accusing the Government of operating an unofficial bypass system in its emergency departments to make the figures look better. That is a very serious allegation, because implicit in it is that safety is being put at risk to make the Government look good. It is a very serious allegation, and I would have expected the ABC - as I did with The West Australian - to have tried to ascertain the truth of the matter. The fact is that it was a complete fabrication and one that should never have been put to air. There were no facts or evidence to support the claim. I would like to inform the House what the facts are. Yesterday in the Legislative Council an answer was provided about the number of many occasions on which the state health emergency director had refused to grant a bypass. There were 11 requests made - Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
Mr J.A. McGINTY: It does not. Our emergency departments this year have coped superbly. Last winter, during the months of May, June, July and August, there were 50 triple diversions. This year there have been three. That is an indicator of how well our doctors and nurses in the frontline are performing this year. I will just repeat the circumstances of how our system has supposedly ground to halt. In the past two days 678 operations have been performed, with 26 cancellations, which is a 3.8 per cent cancellation rate. To those 26 people who have had to have their operations deferred, I say that the Government will reschedule those operations within the next few weeks, and I apologise to them for the inconvenience. It was necessary so that we could extend emergency services to people who need them on an unscheduled basis. I will come back to the article in The West Australian . I have two expectations of the media. The first is that they will get their facts right. I do not think that is an unreasonable expectation, but unfortunately it has not occurred on this occasion. Secondly, I expect that, if an adverse article is written, the person against whom the article has been written has the chance to put the other side of the story. Neither I nor my press officer was contacted by The West Australian and asked to comment on this. Unfortunately, we have failed on both of those fundamental principles of journalism. As members will be aware, the Premier was asked on Paul Murray’s 6PR radio program about the issue of our relationship with The West Australian . The Premier made the point that he did not believe there was any anti-government bias, and I share that view. There is, however, a Fleet Street style of journalism that focuses on the negatives and gross exaggeration and that is designed for one purpose; that is, to boost circulation. I think that is a fairly accurate description of what might be seen in some quarters as a difficulty that the Government has encountered. When I read stories like this about how the system is supposedly grinding to a halt, yet we are still doing more than 600 operations, I at least think that something is not quite right in the message being conveyed. Unfortunately, as often happens in health-related matters, these things become contagious. It is a bit like a disease. We find that this sort of style spreads. Mr R.F. Johnson: What have you got to say to those 26 people, minister? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I have already said it; the member was not listening. I have already said I am sorry their operations were deferred and they will be rescheduled within weeks. That has already been done in some cases. I want to say this in respect of our national broadcaster. It was running an article on its radio program this morning. This is very unfortunate for an organisation that should pride itself on accuracy. Mr A.J. Carpenter: They have lost all their quality. Mr J.A. McGINTY: This morning ABC radio was running a line accusing the Government of operating an unofficial bypass system in its emergency departments to make the figures look better. That is a very serious allegation, because implicit in it is that safety is being put at risk to make the Government look good. It is a very serious allegation, and I would have expected the ABC - as I did with The West Australian - to have tried to ascertain the truth of the matter. The fact is that it was a complete fabrication and one that should never have been put to air. There were no facts or evidence to support the claim. I would like to inform the House what the facts are. Yesterday in the Legislative Council an answer was provided about the number of many occasions on which the state health emergency director had refused to grant a bypass. There were 11 requests made - Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
I will come back to the article in The West Australian . I have two expectations of the media. The first is that they will get their facts right. I do not think that is an unreasonable expectation, but unfortunately it has not occurred on this occasion. Secondly, I expect that, if an adverse article is written, the person against whom the article has been written has the chance to put the other side of the story. Neither I nor my press officer was contacted by The West Australian and asked to comment on this. Unfortunately, we have failed on both of those fundamental principles of journalism. As members will be aware, the Premier was asked on Paul Murray’s 6PR radio program about the issue of our relationship with The West Australian . The Premier made the point that he did not believe there was any anti-government bias, and I share that view. There is, however, a Fleet Street style of journalism that focuses on the negatives and gross exaggeration and that is designed for one purpose; that is, to boost circulation. I think that is a fairly accurate description of what might be seen in some quarters as a difficulty that the Government has encountered. When I read stories like this about how the system is supposedly grinding to a halt, yet we are still doing more than 600 operations, I at least think that something is not quite right in the message being conveyed. Unfortunately, as often happens in health-related matters, these things become contagious. It is a bit like a disease. We find that this sort of style spreads. Mr R.F. Johnson: What have you got to say to those 26 people, minister? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I have already said it; the member was not listening. I have already said I am sorry their operations were deferred and they will be rescheduled within weeks. That has already been done in some cases. I want to say this in respect of our national broadcaster. It was running an article on its radio program this morning. This is very unfortunate for an organisation that should pride itself on accuracy. Mr A.J. Carpenter: They have lost all their quality. Mr J.A. McGINTY: This morning ABC radio was running a line accusing the Government of operating an unofficial bypass system in its emergency departments to make the figures look better. That is a very serious allegation, because implicit in it is that safety is being put at risk to make the Government look good. It is a very serious allegation, and I would have expected the ABC - as I did with The West Australian - to have tried to ascertain the truth of the matter. The fact is that it was a complete fabrication and one that should never have been put to air. There were no facts or evidence to support the claim. I would like to inform the House what the facts are. Yesterday in the Legislative Council an answer was provided about the number of many occasions on which the state health emergency director had refused to grant a bypass. There were 11 requests made - Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
Mr R.F. Johnson: What have you got to say to those 26 people, minister? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I have already said it; the member was not listening. I have already said I am sorry their operations were deferred and they will be rescheduled within weeks. That has already been done in some cases. I want to say this in respect of our national broadcaster. It was running an article on its radio program this morning. This is very unfortunate for an organisation that should pride itself on accuracy. Mr A.J. Carpenter: They have lost all their quality. Mr J.A. McGINTY: This morning ABC radio was running a line accusing the Government of operating an unofficial bypass system in its emergency departments to make the figures look better. That is a very serious allegation, because implicit in it is that safety is being put at risk to make the Government look good. It is a very serious allegation, and I would have expected the ABC - as I did with The West Australian - to have tried to ascertain the truth of the matter. The fact is that it was a complete fabrication and one that should never have been put to air. There were no facts or evidence to support the claim. I would like to inform the House what the facts are. Yesterday in the Legislative Council an answer was provided about the number of many occasions on which the state health emergency director had refused to grant a bypass. There were 11 requests made - Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I have already said it; the member was not listening. I have already said I am sorry their operations were deferred and they will be rescheduled within weeks. That has already been done in some cases. I want to say this in respect of our national broadcaster. It was running an article on its radio program this morning. This is very unfortunate for an organisation that should pride itself on accuracy. Mr A.J. Carpenter: They have lost all their quality. Mr J.A. McGINTY: This morning ABC radio was running a line accusing the Government of operating an unofficial bypass system in its emergency departments to make the figures look better. That is a very serious allegation, because implicit in it is that safety is being put at risk to make the Government look good. It is a very serious allegation, and I would have expected the ABC - as I did with The West Australian - to have tried to ascertain the truth of the matter. The fact is that it was a complete fabrication and one that should never have been put to air. There were no facts or evidence to support the claim. I would like to inform the House what the facts are. Yesterday in the Legislative Council an answer was provided about the number of many occasions on which the state health emergency director had refused to grant a bypass. There were 11 requests made - Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
Mr A.J. Carpenter: They have lost all their quality. Mr J.A. McGINTY: This morning ABC radio was running a line accusing the Government of operating an unofficial bypass system in its emergency departments to make the figures look better. That is a very serious allegation, because implicit in it is that safety is being put at risk to make the Government look good. It is a very serious allegation, and I would have expected the ABC - as I did with The West Australian - to have tried to ascertain the truth of the matter. The fact is that it was a complete fabrication and one that should never have been put to air. There were no facts or evidence to support the claim. I would like to inform the House what the facts are. Yesterday in the Legislative Council an answer was provided about the number of many occasions on which the state health emergency director had refused to grant a bypass. There were 11 requests made - Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
Mr J.A. McGINTY: This morning ABC radio was running a line accusing the Government of operating an unofficial bypass system in its emergency departments to make the figures look better. That is a very serious allegation, because implicit in it is that safety is being put at risk to make the Government look good. It is a very serious allegation, and I would have expected the ABC - as I did with The West Australian - to have tried to ascertain the truth of the matter. The fact is that it was a complete fabrication and one that should never have been put to air. There were no facts or evidence to support the claim. I would like to inform the House what the facts are. Yesterday in the Legislative Council an answer was provided about the number of many occasions on which the state health emergency director had refused to grant a bypass. There were 11 requests made - Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
The SPEAKER: Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Eleven requests have been made since 8 July, following my instruction. Every one of those 11 requests for a bypass from a hospital was approved. There has not been one instance in which a hospital thought it should go on bypass and that has not been agreed to by the state health emergency director. Therefore, any suggestion that somehow or other these figures are being manipulated or massaged in any way is demonstrably incorrect. The story on ABC radio this morning has been refuted by St John Ambulance Australia. I will read from a letter from the association, which I will table. It states - I write in relation to the claims reported in the media today that there was an “unofficial ambulance diversion process” in place whereby St John Ambulance staff (ambulance staff members in the field or within the Ambulance Operations Centre) are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff and distribute or divert ambulances in accordance with their individual requests. I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Unfortunately, it is demonstrably false reporting. I cannot begin to understand why some interest groups, particularly the Australian Medical Association and the Australian Nursing Federation. would want to denigrate the tremendous work that is being done by their members - the doctors and nurses - in the emergency departments in our hospitals. I find it very difficult to understand why that is the case. The fact of the matter is that this year the system is working well; I think the public knows that, notwithstanding this. I will read briefly from the transcript of an interview between the president of the AMA and Liam Bartlett on ABC radio this morning. It states - BARTLETT I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent. That is the reality of the matter. Attempts to divert public attention onto these areas by deliberately putting out misinformation will not succeed. [See paper No 2684.]
I am writing to confirm that this is incorrect. St John Ambulance distributes ambulances in accordance with the patient’s clinical condition (eg Priority 1 patients will be taken to the nearest appropriate facility) and hospital Emergency Department workloads (ie the Ambulance Network Coordinators distribute ambulances in accordance with the prevailing workloads in each of the metropolitan Emergency Departments). As you are aware, this distribution process is undertaken in accordance with written Guidelines/Protocols and the Ambulance Network Coordinators are under the supervision of SJA Team Leaders within the Operations Centre. Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
Directions regarding ambulance diversion from tertiary Emergency Departments are taken only from the State Health Emergency Director. If SJA staff are contacted directly by Emergency Department medical staff, they are referred back to their Supervisor. For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
For your information, David Cloughley, Ambulance Service Manager, SJA has in fact confirmed this with the media today inclusive of an interview with the ABC. Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
Kind regards, Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
Yours sincerely IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
IAN L. KAYE-EDDIE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
I get the impression that the Health Minister thinks that the AMA is living in la-la land because he is getting on with it and he is fixing it - that’s the message he’s giving to the public. SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent.
SKERRITT And that’s true, to an extent.
And that’s true, to an extent.
[See paper No 2684.]
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.