❓ Hon Paddy Embry questions the Minister for Health regarding the lack of a bid for Federal funding for a PET facility in WA, citing potential disadvantages to cancer patients. The Minister defends the decision, citing WA's unique circumstances and the pursuit of direct negotiations for better long-term funding outcomes.
AnsweredQoN 225Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
(1) Is the Minister aware that there is a tendering process that needs to be undertaken to obtain Federal funding for the Positron Emission Topography (PET) facility?
(2) If so, why did he fail to put in a bid?
(3) If not, why is he failing in his duties to provide adequate health care in this State?
(4) Is the Minister aware that by failing to bid for Federal funding that cancer patients will be unable to claim the Medicare rebate?
(5) If so, why is he unwilling to assist West Australians financially?
(6) If not, why not?
(7) What steps will the Minister undertake to ensure that Federal funding for a PET facility occurs in the future?
(2) If so, why did he fail to put in a bid?
(3) If not, why is he failing in his duties to provide adequate health care in this State?
(4) Is the Minister aware that by failing to bid for Federal funding that cancer patients will be unable to claim the Medicare rebate?
(5) If so, why is he unwilling to assist West Australians financially?
(6) If not, why not?
(7) What steps will the Minister undertake to ensure that Federal funding for a PET facility occurs in the future?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
23 October 2001
Responded by
Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Health
Response time
34 days
(2) A tender bid was not put forward by the Western Australian public health sector due to concerns that the Commonwealth funding offer did not consider Western Australia’ unique situation and therefore unfairly disadvantaged Western Australia relative to other states. Unlike other states, Western Australia, due to its remoteness from the eastern seaboard, must purchase additional equipment in order to operate a PET camera. This equipment, known as a cyclotron, is very expensive and therefore results in significant additional capital costs. It was likely that the Commonwealth was unaware of the financial disadvantage the tender process presented to Western Australia, as we are the only state in this unique situation. Furthermore, the tender process had the potential of financially disadvantaging Western Australians, due to its failure to guarantee ongoing patient rebates under the Medicare Benefits Schedule. I therefore considered that direct negotiation with the Commonwealth was likely to produce a better outcome for the state, and for all Western Australians, than entering the tender process. Preliminary discussions with the Commonwealth have indicated their understanding of our concerns. (3) Not applicable. (4) I am aware that without a Commonwealth approved PET service in Western Australia, Medicare rebates, via the Medicare Benefits Schedule, to cancer and other patients would not be guaranteed. However, the action the Government has taken does not preclude the establishing of a PET service in this state which is eligible for Medicare rebates. In fact, eligibility for Medicare rebates is one of the reasons a tender bid was not submitted. The Commonwealth tender guaranteed Medicare rebates for a period of only three years, and explicitly stated that there was no guarantee of rebates after that period. By pursuing direct negotiation with the Commonwealth the Government is attempting to secure an ongoing commitment for Medicare rebates so that Western Australians who access PET services will not be financially disadvantaged in the future. (5) The Government’s decision to pursue direct negotiations with the Commonwealth aims to secure ongoing financial assistance for Western Australians accessing PET services by seeking a commitment from the Commonwealth for ongoing Medicare Benefits Schedule rebates, rather than a limited three year commitment. The actions of the Government highlight a concern for the financial situation of Western Australians and a commitment to ensuring financial assistance for PET services is ongoing and not limited to the initial three year period. (6) Not applicable. (7) I have written to Dr Woodridge requesting consideration of a number of issues. In particular, I highlighted Western Australia’s special circumstances and asked for consideration by the Commonwealth for the provision of additional capital funding so that Western Australia is not unfairly disadvantaged relative to other states. I also have endeavoured to secure an ongoing Commonwealth commitment to funding for PET under the Medicare Benefits Schedule, so as to ensure that Western Australians are not financially disadvantaged in the future. Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
Unlike other states, Western Australia, due to its remoteness from the eastern seaboard, must purchase additional equipment in order to operate a PET camera. This equipment, known as a cyclotron, is very expensive and therefore results in significant additional capital costs. It was likely that the Commonwealth was unaware of the financial disadvantage the tender process presented to Western Australia, as we are the only state in this unique situation. Furthermore, the tender process had the potential of financially disadvantaging Western Australians, due to its failure to guarantee ongoing patient rebates under the Medicare Benefits Schedule. I therefore considered that direct negotiation with the Commonwealth was likely to produce a better outcome for the state, and for all Western Australians, than entering the tender process. Preliminary discussions with the Commonwealth have indicated their understanding of our concerns. (3) Not applicable. (4) I am aware that without a Commonwealth approved PET service in Western Australia, Medicare rebates, via the Medicare Benefits Schedule, to cancer and other patients would not be guaranteed. However, the action the Government has taken does not preclude the establishing of a PET service in this state which is eligible for Medicare rebates. In fact, eligibility for Medicare rebates is one of the reasons a tender bid was not submitted. The Commonwealth tender guaranteed Medicare rebates for a period of only three years, and explicitly stated that there was no guarantee of rebates after that period. By pursuing direct negotiation with the Commonwealth the Government is attempting to secure an ongoing commitment for Medicare rebates so that Western Australians who access PET services will not be financially disadvantaged in the future. (5) The Government’s decision to pursue direct negotiations with the Commonwealth aims to secure ongoing financial assistance for Western Australians accessing PET services by seeking a commitment from the Commonwealth for ongoing Medicare Benefits Schedule rebates, rather than a limited three year commitment. The actions of the Government highlight a concern for the financial situation of Western Australians and a commitment to ensuring financial assistance for PET services is ongoing and not limited to the initial three year period. (6) Not applicable. (7) I have written to Dr Woodridge requesting consideration of a number of issues. In particular, I highlighted Western Australia’s special circumstances and asked for consideration by the Commonwealth for the provision of additional capital funding so that Western Australia is not unfairly disadvantaged relative to other states. I also have endeavoured to secure an ongoing Commonwealth commitment to funding for PET under the Medicare Benefits Schedule, so as to ensure that Western Australians are not financially disadvantaged in the future. Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
Furthermore, the tender process had the potential of financially disadvantaging Western Australians, due to its failure to guarantee ongoing patient rebates under the Medicare Benefits Schedule. I therefore considered that direct negotiation with the Commonwealth was likely to produce a better outcome for the state, and for all Western Australians, than entering the tender process. Preliminary discussions with the Commonwealth have indicated their understanding of our concerns. (3) Not applicable. (4) I am aware that without a Commonwealth approved PET service in Western Australia, Medicare rebates, via the Medicare Benefits Schedule, to cancer and other patients would not be guaranteed. However, the action the Government has taken does not preclude the establishing of a PET service in this state which is eligible for Medicare rebates. In fact, eligibility for Medicare rebates is one of the reasons a tender bid was not submitted. The Commonwealth tender guaranteed Medicare rebates for a period of only three years, and explicitly stated that there was no guarantee of rebates after that period. By pursuing direct negotiation with the Commonwealth the Government is attempting to secure an ongoing commitment for Medicare rebates so that Western Australians who access PET services will not be financially disadvantaged in the future. (5) The Government’s decision to pursue direct negotiations with the Commonwealth aims to secure ongoing financial assistance for Western Australians accessing PET services by seeking a commitment from the Commonwealth for ongoing Medicare Benefits Schedule rebates, rather than a limited three year commitment. The actions of the Government highlight a concern for the financial situation of Western Australians and a commitment to ensuring financial assistance for PET services is ongoing and not limited to the initial three year period. (6) Not applicable. (7) I have written to Dr Woodridge requesting consideration of a number of issues. In particular, I highlighted Western Australia’s special circumstances and asked for consideration by the Commonwealth for the provision of additional capital funding so that Western Australia is not unfairly disadvantaged relative to other states. I also have endeavoured to secure an ongoing Commonwealth commitment to funding for PET under the Medicare Benefits Schedule, so as to ensure that Western Australians are not financially disadvantaged in the future. Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
I therefore considered that direct negotiation with the Commonwealth was likely to produce a better outcome for the state, and for all Western Australians, than entering the tender process. Preliminary discussions with the Commonwealth have indicated their understanding of our concerns. (3) Not applicable. (4) I am aware that without a Commonwealth approved PET service in Western Australia, Medicare rebates, via the Medicare Benefits Schedule, to cancer and other patients would not be guaranteed. However, the action the Government has taken does not preclude the establishing of a PET service in this state which is eligible for Medicare rebates. In fact, eligibility for Medicare rebates is one of the reasons a tender bid was not submitted. The Commonwealth tender guaranteed Medicare rebates for a period of only three years, and explicitly stated that there was no guarantee of rebates after that period. By pursuing direct negotiation with the Commonwealth the Government is attempting to secure an ongoing commitment for Medicare rebates so that Western Australians who access PET services will not be financially disadvantaged in the future. (5) The Government’s decision to pursue direct negotiations with the Commonwealth aims to secure ongoing financial assistance for Western Australians accessing PET services by seeking a commitment from the Commonwealth for ongoing Medicare Benefits Schedule rebates, rather than a limited three year commitment. The actions of the Government highlight a concern for the financial situation of Western Australians and a commitment to ensuring financial assistance for PET services is ongoing and not limited to the initial three year period. (6) Not applicable. (7) I have written to Dr Woodridge requesting consideration of a number of issues. In particular, I highlighted Western Australia’s special circumstances and asked for consideration by the Commonwealth for the provision of additional capital funding so that Western Australia is not unfairly disadvantaged relative to other states. I also have endeavoured to secure an ongoing Commonwealth commitment to funding for PET under the Medicare Benefits Schedule, so as to ensure that Western Australians are not financially disadvantaged in the future. Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
(3) Not applicable. (4) I am aware that without a Commonwealth approved PET service in Western Australia, Medicare rebates, via the Medicare Benefits Schedule, to cancer and other patients would not be guaranteed. However, the action the Government has taken does not preclude the establishing of a PET service in this state which is eligible for Medicare rebates. In fact, eligibility for Medicare rebates is one of the reasons a tender bid was not submitted. The Commonwealth tender guaranteed Medicare rebates for a period of only three years, and explicitly stated that there was no guarantee of rebates after that period. By pursuing direct negotiation with the Commonwealth the Government is attempting to secure an ongoing commitment for Medicare rebates so that Western Australians who access PET services will not be financially disadvantaged in the future. (5) The Government’s decision to pursue direct negotiations with the Commonwealth aims to secure ongoing financial assistance for Western Australians accessing PET services by seeking a commitment from the Commonwealth for ongoing Medicare Benefits Schedule rebates, rather than a limited three year commitment. The actions of the Government highlight a concern for the financial situation of Western Australians and a commitment to ensuring financial assistance for PET services is ongoing and not limited to the initial three year period. (6) Not applicable. (7) I have written to Dr Woodridge requesting consideration of a number of issues. In particular, I highlighted Western Australia’s special circumstances and asked for consideration by the Commonwealth for the provision of additional capital funding so that Western Australia is not unfairly disadvantaged relative to other states. I also have endeavoured to secure an ongoing Commonwealth commitment to funding for PET under the Medicare Benefits Schedule, so as to ensure that Western Australians are not financially disadvantaged in the future. Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
(4) I am aware that without a Commonwealth approved PET service in Western Australia, Medicare rebates, via the Medicare Benefits Schedule, to cancer and other patients would not be guaranteed. However, the action the Government has taken does not preclude the establishing of a PET service in this state which is eligible for Medicare rebates. In fact, eligibility for Medicare rebates is one of the reasons a tender bid was not submitted. The Commonwealth tender guaranteed Medicare rebates for a period of only three years, and explicitly stated that there was no guarantee of rebates after that period. By pursuing direct negotiation with the Commonwealth the Government is attempting to secure an ongoing commitment for Medicare rebates so that Western Australians who access PET services will not be financially disadvantaged in the future. (5) The Government’s decision to pursue direct negotiations with the Commonwealth aims to secure ongoing financial assistance for Western Australians accessing PET services by seeking a commitment from the Commonwealth for ongoing Medicare Benefits Schedule rebates, rather than a limited three year commitment. The actions of the Government highlight a concern for the financial situation of Western Australians and a commitment to ensuring financial assistance for PET services is ongoing and not limited to the initial three year period. (6) Not applicable. (7) I have written to Dr Woodridge requesting consideration of a number of issues. In particular, I highlighted Western Australia’s special circumstances and asked for consideration by the Commonwealth for the provision of additional capital funding so that Western Australia is not unfairly disadvantaged relative to other states. I also have endeavoured to secure an ongoing Commonwealth commitment to funding for PET under the Medicare Benefits Schedule, so as to ensure that Western Australians are not financially disadvantaged in the future. Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
The Commonwealth tender guaranteed Medicare rebates for a period of only three years, and explicitly stated that there was no guarantee of rebates after that period. By pursuing direct negotiation with the Commonwealth the Government is attempting to secure an ongoing commitment for Medicare rebates so that Western Australians who access PET services will not be financially disadvantaged in the future. (5) The Government’s decision to pursue direct negotiations with the Commonwealth aims to secure ongoing financial assistance for Western Australians accessing PET services by seeking a commitment from the Commonwealth for ongoing Medicare Benefits Schedule rebates, rather than a limited three year commitment. The actions of the Government highlight a concern for the financial situation of Western Australians and a commitment to ensuring financial assistance for PET services is ongoing and not limited to the initial three year period. (6) Not applicable. (7) I have written to Dr Woodridge requesting consideration of a number of issues. In particular, I highlighted Western Australia’s special circumstances and asked for consideration by the Commonwealth for the provision of additional capital funding so that Western Australia is not unfairly disadvantaged relative to other states. I also have endeavoured to secure an ongoing Commonwealth commitment to funding for PET under the Medicare Benefits Schedule, so as to ensure that Western Australians are not financially disadvantaged in the future. Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
By pursuing direct negotiation with the Commonwealth the Government is attempting to secure an ongoing commitment for Medicare rebates so that Western Australians who access PET services will not be financially disadvantaged in the future. (5) The Government’s decision to pursue direct negotiations with the Commonwealth aims to secure ongoing financial assistance for Western Australians accessing PET services by seeking a commitment from the Commonwealth for ongoing Medicare Benefits Schedule rebates, rather than a limited three year commitment. The actions of the Government highlight a concern for the financial situation of Western Australians and a commitment to ensuring financial assistance for PET services is ongoing and not limited to the initial three year period. (6) Not applicable. (7) I have written to Dr Woodridge requesting consideration of a number of issues. In particular, I highlighted Western Australia’s special circumstances and asked for consideration by the Commonwealth for the provision of additional capital funding so that Western Australia is not unfairly disadvantaged relative to other states. I also have endeavoured to secure an ongoing Commonwealth commitment to funding for PET under the Medicare Benefits Schedule, so as to ensure that Western Australians are not financially disadvantaged in the future. Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
(5) The Government’s decision to pursue direct negotiations with the Commonwealth aims to secure ongoing financial assistance for Western Australians accessing PET services by seeking a commitment from the Commonwealth for ongoing Medicare Benefits Schedule rebates, rather than a limited three year commitment. The actions of the Government highlight a concern for the financial situation of Western Australians and a commitment to ensuring financial assistance for PET services is ongoing and not limited to the initial three year period. (6) Not applicable. (7) I have written to Dr Woodridge requesting consideration of a number of issues. In particular, I highlighted Western Australia’s special circumstances and asked for consideration by the Commonwealth for the provision of additional capital funding so that Western Australia is not unfairly disadvantaged relative to other states. I also have endeavoured to secure an ongoing Commonwealth commitment to funding for PET under the Medicare Benefits Schedule, so as to ensure that Western Australians are not financially disadvantaged in the future. Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
(6) Not applicable. (7) I have written to Dr Woodridge requesting consideration of a number of issues. In particular, I highlighted Western Australia’s special circumstances and asked for consideration by the Commonwealth for the provision of additional capital funding so that Western Australia is not unfairly disadvantaged relative to other states. I also have endeavoured to secure an ongoing Commonwealth commitment to funding for PET under the Medicare Benefits Schedule, so as to ensure that Western Australians are not financially disadvantaged in the future. Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
(7) I have written to Dr Woodridge requesting consideration of a number of issues. In particular, I highlighted Western Australia’s special circumstances and asked for consideration by the Commonwealth for the provision of additional capital funding so that Western Australia is not unfairly disadvantaged relative to other states. I also have endeavoured to secure an ongoing Commonwealth commitment to funding for PET under the Medicare Benefits Schedule, so as to ensure that Western Australians are not financially disadvantaged in the future. Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
Unlike other states, Western Australia, due to its remoteness from the eastern seaboard, must purchase additional equipment in order to operate a PET camera. This equipment, known as a cyclotron, is very expensive and therefore results in significant additional capital costs. It was likely that the Commonwealth was unaware of the financial disadvantage the tender process presented to Western Australia, as we are the only state in this unique situation. Furthermore, the tender process had the potential of financially disadvantaging Western Australians, due to its failure to guarantee ongoing patient rebates under the Medicare Benefits Schedule. I therefore considered that direct negotiation with the Commonwealth was likely to produce a better outcome for the state, and for all Western Australians, than entering the tender process. Preliminary discussions with the Commonwealth have indicated their understanding of our concerns. (3) Not applicable. (4) I am aware that without a Commonwealth approved PET service in Western Australia, Medicare rebates, via the Medicare Benefits Schedule, to cancer and other patients would not be guaranteed. However, the action the Government has taken does not preclude the establishing of a PET service in this state which is eligible for Medicare rebates. In fact, eligibility for Medicare rebates is one of the reasons a tender bid was not submitted. The Commonwealth tender guaranteed Medicare rebates for a period of only three years, and explicitly stated that there was no guarantee of rebates after that period. By pursuing direct negotiation with the Commonwealth the Government is attempting to secure an ongoing commitment for Medicare rebates so that Western Australians who access PET services will not be financially disadvantaged in the future. (5) The Government’s decision to pursue direct negotiations with the Commonwealth aims to secure ongoing financial assistance for Western Australians accessing PET services by seeking a commitment from the Commonwealth for ongoing Medicare Benefits Schedule rebates, rather than a limited three year commitment. The actions of the Government highlight a concern for the financial situation of Western Australians and a commitment to ensuring financial assistance for PET services is ongoing and not limited to the initial three year period. (6) Not applicable. (7) I have written to Dr Woodridge requesting consideration of a number of issues. In particular, I highlighted Western Australia’s special circumstances and asked for consideration by the Commonwealth for the provision of additional capital funding so that Western Australia is not unfairly disadvantaged relative to other states. I also have endeavoured to secure an ongoing Commonwealth commitment to funding for PET under the Medicare Benefits Schedule, so as to ensure that Western Australians are not financially disadvantaged in the future. Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
Furthermore, the tender process had the potential of financially disadvantaging Western Australians, due to its failure to guarantee ongoing patient rebates under the Medicare Benefits Schedule. I therefore considered that direct negotiation with the Commonwealth was likely to produce a better outcome for the state, and for all Western Australians, than entering the tender process. Preliminary discussions with the Commonwealth have indicated their understanding of our concerns. (3) Not applicable. (4) I am aware that without a Commonwealth approved PET service in Western Australia, Medicare rebates, via the Medicare Benefits Schedule, to cancer and other patients would not be guaranteed. However, the action the Government has taken does not preclude the establishing of a PET service in this state which is eligible for Medicare rebates. In fact, eligibility for Medicare rebates is one of the reasons a tender bid was not submitted. The Commonwealth tender guaranteed Medicare rebates for a period of only three years, and explicitly stated that there was no guarantee of rebates after that period. By pursuing direct negotiation with the Commonwealth the Government is attempting to secure an ongoing commitment for Medicare rebates so that Western Australians who access PET services will not be financially disadvantaged in the future. (5) The Government’s decision to pursue direct negotiations with the Commonwealth aims to secure ongoing financial assistance for Western Australians accessing PET services by seeking a commitment from the Commonwealth for ongoing Medicare Benefits Schedule rebates, rather than a limited three year commitment. The actions of the Government highlight a concern for the financial situation of Western Australians and a commitment to ensuring financial assistance for PET services is ongoing and not limited to the initial three year period. (6) Not applicable. (7) I have written to Dr Woodridge requesting consideration of a number of issues. In particular, I highlighted Western Australia’s special circumstances and asked for consideration by the Commonwealth for the provision of additional capital funding so that Western Australia is not unfairly disadvantaged relative to other states. I also have endeavoured to secure an ongoing Commonwealth commitment to funding for PET under the Medicare Benefits Schedule, so as to ensure that Western Australians are not financially disadvantaged in the future. Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
I therefore considered that direct negotiation with the Commonwealth was likely to produce a better outcome for the state, and for all Western Australians, than entering the tender process. Preliminary discussions with the Commonwealth have indicated their understanding of our concerns. (3) Not applicable. (4) I am aware that without a Commonwealth approved PET service in Western Australia, Medicare rebates, via the Medicare Benefits Schedule, to cancer and other patients would not be guaranteed. However, the action the Government has taken does not preclude the establishing of a PET service in this state which is eligible for Medicare rebates. In fact, eligibility for Medicare rebates is one of the reasons a tender bid was not submitted. The Commonwealth tender guaranteed Medicare rebates for a period of only three years, and explicitly stated that there was no guarantee of rebates after that period. By pursuing direct negotiation with the Commonwealth the Government is attempting to secure an ongoing commitment for Medicare rebates so that Western Australians who access PET services will not be financially disadvantaged in the future. (5) The Government’s decision to pursue direct negotiations with the Commonwealth aims to secure ongoing financial assistance for Western Australians accessing PET services by seeking a commitment from the Commonwealth for ongoing Medicare Benefits Schedule rebates, rather than a limited three year commitment. The actions of the Government highlight a concern for the financial situation of Western Australians and a commitment to ensuring financial assistance for PET services is ongoing and not limited to the initial three year period. (6) Not applicable. (7) I have written to Dr Woodridge requesting consideration of a number of issues. In particular, I highlighted Western Australia’s special circumstances and asked for consideration by the Commonwealth for the provision of additional capital funding so that Western Australia is not unfairly disadvantaged relative to other states. I also have endeavoured to secure an ongoing Commonwealth commitment to funding for PET under the Medicare Benefits Schedule, so as to ensure that Western Australians are not financially disadvantaged in the future. Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
(3) Not applicable. (4) I am aware that without a Commonwealth approved PET service in Western Australia, Medicare rebates, via the Medicare Benefits Schedule, to cancer and other patients would not be guaranteed. However, the action the Government has taken does not preclude the establishing of a PET service in this state which is eligible for Medicare rebates. In fact, eligibility for Medicare rebates is one of the reasons a tender bid was not submitted. The Commonwealth tender guaranteed Medicare rebates for a period of only three years, and explicitly stated that there was no guarantee of rebates after that period. By pursuing direct negotiation with the Commonwealth the Government is attempting to secure an ongoing commitment for Medicare rebates so that Western Australians who access PET services will not be financially disadvantaged in the future. (5) The Government’s decision to pursue direct negotiations with the Commonwealth aims to secure ongoing financial assistance for Western Australians accessing PET services by seeking a commitment from the Commonwealth for ongoing Medicare Benefits Schedule rebates, rather than a limited three year commitment. The actions of the Government highlight a concern for the financial situation of Western Australians and a commitment to ensuring financial assistance for PET services is ongoing and not limited to the initial three year period. (6) Not applicable. (7) I have written to Dr Woodridge requesting consideration of a number of issues. In particular, I highlighted Western Australia’s special circumstances and asked for consideration by the Commonwealth for the provision of additional capital funding so that Western Australia is not unfairly disadvantaged relative to other states. I also have endeavoured to secure an ongoing Commonwealth commitment to funding for PET under the Medicare Benefits Schedule, so as to ensure that Western Australians are not financially disadvantaged in the future. Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
(4) I am aware that without a Commonwealth approved PET service in Western Australia, Medicare rebates, via the Medicare Benefits Schedule, to cancer and other patients would not be guaranteed. However, the action the Government has taken does not preclude the establishing of a PET service in this state which is eligible for Medicare rebates. In fact, eligibility for Medicare rebates is one of the reasons a tender bid was not submitted. The Commonwealth tender guaranteed Medicare rebates for a period of only three years, and explicitly stated that there was no guarantee of rebates after that period. By pursuing direct negotiation with the Commonwealth the Government is attempting to secure an ongoing commitment for Medicare rebates so that Western Australians who access PET services will not be financially disadvantaged in the future. (5) The Government’s decision to pursue direct negotiations with the Commonwealth aims to secure ongoing financial assistance for Western Australians accessing PET services by seeking a commitment from the Commonwealth for ongoing Medicare Benefits Schedule rebates, rather than a limited three year commitment. The actions of the Government highlight a concern for the financial situation of Western Australians and a commitment to ensuring financial assistance for PET services is ongoing and not limited to the initial three year period. (6) Not applicable. (7) I have written to Dr Woodridge requesting consideration of a number of issues. In particular, I highlighted Western Australia’s special circumstances and asked for consideration by the Commonwealth for the provision of additional capital funding so that Western Australia is not unfairly disadvantaged relative to other states. I also have endeavoured to secure an ongoing Commonwealth commitment to funding for PET under the Medicare Benefits Schedule, so as to ensure that Western Australians are not financially disadvantaged in the future. Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
The Commonwealth tender guaranteed Medicare rebates for a period of only three years, and explicitly stated that there was no guarantee of rebates after that period. By pursuing direct negotiation with the Commonwealth the Government is attempting to secure an ongoing commitment for Medicare rebates so that Western Australians who access PET services will not be financially disadvantaged in the future. (5) The Government’s decision to pursue direct negotiations with the Commonwealth aims to secure ongoing financial assistance for Western Australians accessing PET services by seeking a commitment from the Commonwealth for ongoing Medicare Benefits Schedule rebates, rather than a limited three year commitment. The actions of the Government highlight a concern for the financial situation of Western Australians and a commitment to ensuring financial assistance for PET services is ongoing and not limited to the initial three year period. (6) Not applicable. (7) I have written to Dr Woodridge requesting consideration of a number of issues. In particular, I highlighted Western Australia’s special circumstances and asked for consideration by the Commonwealth for the provision of additional capital funding so that Western Australia is not unfairly disadvantaged relative to other states. I also have endeavoured to secure an ongoing Commonwealth commitment to funding for PET under the Medicare Benefits Schedule, so as to ensure that Western Australians are not financially disadvantaged in the future. Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
By pursuing direct negotiation with the Commonwealth the Government is attempting to secure an ongoing commitment for Medicare rebates so that Western Australians who access PET services will not be financially disadvantaged in the future. (5) The Government’s decision to pursue direct negotiations with the Commonwealth aims to secure ongoing financial assistance for Western Australians accessing PET services by seeking a commitment from the Commonwealth for ongoing Medicare Benefits Schedule rebates, rather than a limited three year commitment. The actions of the Government highlight a concern for the financial situation of Western Australians and a commitment to ensuring financial assistance for PET services is ongoing and not limited to the initial three year period. (6) Not applicable. (7) I have written to Dr Woodridge requesting consideration of a number of issues. In particular, I highlighted Western Australia’s special circumstances and asked for consideration by the Commonwealth for the provision of additional capital funding so that Western Australia is not unfairly disadvantaged relative to other states. I also have endeavoured to secure an ongoing Commonwealth commitment to funding for PET under the Medicare Benefits Schedule, so as to ensure that Western Australians are not financially disadvantaged in the future. Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
(5) The Government’s decision to pursue direct negotiations with the Commonwealth aims to secure ongoing financial assistance for Western Australians accessing PET services by seeking a commitment from the Commonwealth for ongoing Medicare Benefits Schedule rebates, rather than a limited three year commitment. The actions of the Government highlight a concern for the financial situation of Western Australians and a commitment to ensuring financial assistance for PET services is ongoing and not limited to the initial three year period. (6) Not applicable. (7) I have written to Dr Woodridge requesting consideration of a number of issues. In particular, I highlighted Western Australia’s special circumstances and asked for consideration by the Commonwealth for the provision of additional capital funding so that Western Australia is not unfairly disadvantaged relative to other states. I also have endeavoured to secure an ongoing Commonwealth commitment to funding for PET under the Medicare Benefits Schedule, so as to ensure that Western Australians are not financially disadvantaged in the future. Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
(6) Not applicable. (7) I have written to Dr Woodridge requesting consideration of a number of issues. In particular, I highlighted Western Australia’s special circumstances and asked for consideration by the Commonwealth for the provision of additional capital funding so that Western Australia is not unfairly disadvantaged relative to other states. I also have endeavoured to secure an ongoing Commonwealth commitment to funding for PET under the Medicare Benefits Schedule, so as to ensure that Western Australians are not financially disadvantaged in the future. Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
(7) I have written to Dr Woodridge requesting consideration of a number of issues. In particular, I highlighted Western Australia’s special circumstances and asked for consideration by the Commonwealth for the provision of additional capital funding so that Western Australia is not unfairly disadvantaged relative to other states. I also have endeavoured to secure an ongoing Commonwealth commitment to funding for PET under the Medicare Benefits Schedule, so as to ensure that Western Australians are not financially disadvantaged in the future. Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
Since my letter, I have spoken with Dr Wooldridge and as a result believe that the Commonwealth understands the issues I have raised. I will continue my discussions with the Commonwealth and am optimistic that we can negotiate the establishing of a PET facility in this state based on conditions which do not financially disadvantage Western Australia and which provide security regarding ongoing Medicare funding for this service.
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.