House of Assembly Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3) 51 3 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Swine Flu SWINE FLU Ms PORTOLESI House of Assembly Hartley SWINE FLU Ms PORTOLESI (Hartley) (14:51): My question is to the Minister for Health. What is the minister's response to recent comments about the management of a swine flu case at Flinders Medical Centre? The Hon. J.D. HILL House of Assembly Kaurna Minister for Health Minister for the Southern Suburbs Minister Assisting the Premier in the Arts SWINE FLU The Hon. J.D. HILL (Kaurna—Minister for Health, Minister for the Southern Suburbs, Minister Assisting the Premier in the Arts) (14:52): As I informed the house earlier today, we now have a total of 86 people who have tested positive for Influenza H1N1, known as swine flu. Yesterday, the opposition's deputy leader emerged to make a series of what can only be described as irrational and plainly incorrect claims. First, the deputy leader claimed that SA Health and I were engaged in a cover-up in relation to a pregnant woman who was briefly hospitalised and then later tested positive for swine flu. I will quote from the deputy leader's press release. She said: A female patient tested positive for swine flu at Flinders Medical Centre last Friday after first testing negative to the illness. She also said: The Rann government has engaged in a swine flu cover-up with a victim slipping through the screening process. Let's look at the facts. The Hon. K.O. Foley House of Assembly The Hon. K.O. Foley: There's a pattern emerging here. The Hon. J.D. HILL House of Assembly The Hon. J.D. HILL: There is a pattern emerging. These are the facts. Last Tuesday, a pregnant woman presented to the Flinders Medical Centre with symptoms of vomiting and nausea. The patient did not have respiratory symptoms, she did not have a fever, she had no known contact with any swine flu case, nor did she have a travel history to regions where swine flu is a problem. There was nothing to indicate to the medical staff—the doctors and nurses—that there was a flu risk, swine or otherwise. As the patient was pregnant, she was admitted, surprisingly, to the obstetrics department and, on Wednesday last week—after having been admitted—she developed respiratory symptoms. Taking appropriate precautions, the clinical staff—that is, the doctors and the nurses—recognised that she now had flulike symptoms, so she was removed from the shared ward and placed in a single room. Members interjecting: The Hon. J.D. HILL House of Assembly The Hon. J.D. HILL: Just listen to this. She was admitted to the hospital with non-flulike symptoms—that is, she had vomiting and nausea, which would be symptomatic of some other illness—and she was put in the obstetrics department. She then developed flulike symptoms. The doctors and nurses recognised this and immediately put her into a single room and then took swab tests to see whether or not she had swine flu. Late on Thursday afternoon, the tests returned positive for swine flu. She had two swabs taken, one of her nose and one of her throat. One of the swab tests was positive and one was negative, but they took it to be that she had swine flu. Ms Chapman interjecting: The Hon. J.D. HILL House of Assembly The Hon. J.D. HILL: I would welcome the Deputy Leader of the Opposition's questions on this subject as, indeed, I would on any other subject. Unfortunately, she does not seem to get opportunities in question time so she has to ask her questions when someone else is talking. Late on Thursday afternoon—that is, a day after the test was taken—the patient's test was returned, and it proved to be positive. The pregnant woman was advised, but by that time she had already recovered from her illness and had been discharged. So, she was no longer in hospital. The Department of Health and I were informed of that positive test on Thursday, and we were also informed that the woman had been discharged. The patient was, of course, then included in the Friday 12 June daily update of swine flu cases (every day—I think it is around 1.30 or 2pm—the Chief Medical Officer comes out and tells the public how many cases there are). However, as the woman was no longer in hospital, and had tested positive after she had been discharged, she was not included in the number of hospitalised swine flu cases. If she had been included we would have been misleading people about the number of patients hospitalised. As a precaution, patients with whom the woman had originally shared a room were offered courses of Tamiflu; none of those patients has contracted swine flu. In addition, more than 10 staff who were in contact with the woman were given Tamiflu and released from work for 72 hours; all are now back at work and none of those people has developed swine flu. As the respected and veteran journalist Ray Martin once said about the deputy leader, 'How could a politician get it so wrong?' Just eight weeks after she got it so spectacularly wrong by incorrectly claiming that a patient in Mount Gambier had missed out on a kidney transplant, with the organ going to waste, the deputy leader has again rushed out to comment on something without checking the facts. Yesterday she also told radio that SA Health was 'ducking for cover' in regard to swine flu in this state. That is an incredible allegation, given that the state's Chief Medical Officer, Professor Paddy Phillips, has updated the media on swine flu on a daily basis over the past three weeks, and given that I, as minister, have made a number of statements both in the media and to this house, as the situation has evolved. The deputy leader's behaviour is nothing short of irresponsible. She should stop knocking the very good work of our doctors, nurses and public servants as they manage this outbreak. I urge South Australians, if they want more information on swine flu, to contact the commonwealth government hotline on 180 2007 or go to SA Health's dedicated flu website at www.flu.sa.gov.au.