MOUNT BARKER HOSPITAL

Mr GOLDSWORTHY (Kavel) (15:22): My question is also to the Minister for Health. Why will it take up to six weeks to carry out an investigation into the safety of the operating theatre procedures at Mount Barker Hospital, and what guarantee can the minister give that patients will not be put at risk during this investigation period?

The minister was advised on 29 October 2007 of several serious issues that have occurred at the hospital, including the failure to have two doctors in attendance for emergency caesarean sections; gaps in theatre staff on the on-call roster, causing theatre closures; and concern over neonatal resuscitation staff provisions. All these issues have come about because of lack of funding to the hospital.

The SPEAKER: Order! That is not an explanation.

The Hon. J.D. HILL (Kaurna—Minister for Health, Minister for the Southern Suburbs, Minister Assisting the Premier in the Arts) (15:23): The member asked: 'Why will it take six weeks?' How much time does the member honestly think a proper review of a set of arrangements in a hospital should take—six minutes, six days, six hours? Tell me, member for Kavel, what do you think is appropriate? By the very nature of his question, he is implying that the time we are suggesting it will take is wrong. On what basis does the member for Kavel establish what is the correct time frame within which this should be conducted? He has no idea at all. Let me answer the question in this way.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. J.D. HILL: I beg your pardon, Mitch?

Mr Williams interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. J.D. HILL: I intend to answer the question. However, there is a premise in the question that suggests there is something wrong with respect to the time that it will take. I am asking the member for Kavel on what basis does he draw the conclusion that six weeks is wrong? That is what I am asking.

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. J.D. HILL: There was something implicit in his question. I received a letter on 30 October this year from a GP anaesthetist, Dr Paul Lehmann, regarding the operation of the Mount Barker operating theatre (interestingly, in the local paper he said that he wished to remain anonymous but, in the television story the night after, he was anything but anonymous). I then referred the matter to Country Health and the Department of Health for immediate action. An independent expert will review nursing operation standards (that is the ACORN system, I am advised), and that process should be concluded by 23 November 2007. Dr Jeffrey Robinson, an eminent obstetrician and Chair of the Maternal and Neonatal Clinical Network, will consider questions regarding neonatal care at the hospital. Any quality and safety issues will be dealt with as a matter of urgency.

I point out to the member that, of course, this is a hospital that is run by its own independent board. It is not run by the Department of Health of South Australia: it is run by a board. The board is funded to provide services and it makes decisions about how those services are delivered. That is the key point, and it is a system that you defend. It is extraordinary to me that members come in here time and again raising issues about the management of country health yet, when I try to change the system so that I am directly responsible and so I can be brought to account if anything goes wrong, they do not want it to happen. It is amazing hypocrisy by members on the other side.

I also received a subsequent letter from Dr Lehmann on 12 November, and I have written back to him telling him that, in the interim, in relation to caesarean sections (which was the basis of his concern), extra support will be provided while the review is being carried out.