Mr. Cook questions the Minister for Health about the decision to increase parking fees at Fiona Stanley Hospital, specifically asking if alternatives were considered and if communication occurred with Murdoch Hospital regarding their parking fees. The Minister defends the decision by stating it was made independently but resulted in fees aligned with St John's, while remaining lower than other major hospitals.

AnsweredQoN 805Legislative Assembly
Asked
16 October 2014
Portfolio
Health

QuestionView source ↗

FIONA STANLEY HOSPITAL — PARKING FEES
805. Mr R.H. COOK to the Minister for
Health:
I have a supplementary question.
Before the minister decided to slug vulnerable patients and families with these
high increases, what other options did he consider? Did he, for instance, call
the chief executive officer at Murdoch and ask him not to increase his parking
fees?

AnswerView source ↗

No; because we ended up in concert
but not in collusion. I did not know St John was putting up its fees. I first
found out St John had put up its fees after it had done it. St John had made
that decision to charge that fee and changed all its paraphernalia, so we were
left with the dilemma: do we leave our fees at the rate we set, or do we make
them the same as St John's fees? Remember that although the fees will
be the same as the hospital next door charges, they will still be less than the
fees for patients who go to Sir Charles Gairdner and to Royal Perth. I might
say that the patients who go to Royal Perth have been paying higher fees for a
long period.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more