House of Assembly Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1) 55 1 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Ambulance Ramping Ambulance Ramping The Hon. V.A. TARZIA House of Assembly Hartley Leader of the Opposition Ambulance Ramping The Hon. V.A. TARZIA (Hartley—Leader of the Opposition) (14:54): My question is to the Premier. Has the Premier reviewed SA Health's ambulance transport and handover policy and, if so, does he have any concerns with it? With your leave, sir, and that of the house, I will explain. Leave granted. The Hon. V.A. TARZIA House of Assembly Hartley Leader of the Opposition The Hon. V.A. TARZIA: Feedback from SASMOA to SA Health on the policy included concerns that 'patients will die and staff will leave,' and that 'there would be unattended patients in invisible spots in the ED getting no care or indeed no monitoring.' The Hon. C.J. PICTON House of Assembly Kaurna Minister for Health and Wellbeing The Hon. C.J. PICTON (Kaurna—Minister for Health and Wellbeing) (14:55): It is accurate that there has been an update to the ambulance transport policy, and that followed expert review that we had undertaken by eminent clinicians professors Bill Griggs, former South Australian of the Year and very well known to the public, and Keith McNeil, who is the Commissioner for Excellence and Innovation in Health. They made recommendations. They pointed out an area of what they regarded as some clinicians having legal questions about. They looked at the case law. They looked at what was in place particularly in the UK and what was in place in other states, and made the recommendation to us that we needed to update the policy to make clear what I think most people would understand, in that when a patient has been presented to an emergency department and when they have been triaged in the hospital system, the hospital and the local health network have some legal responsibility over that patient. I haven't actually heard people making an argument against that, including from the opposition. I think it is telling that the Leader of the Opposition and not the member for Schubert asked this question because when the member for Schubert has previously made some statements about this matter, they have been absolutely rebuked by our ambulance officers. What happened was we had the member for Schubert coming out and saying that our ambos would 'dump and run' patients at emergency departments, which was an absolutely abhorrent suggestion from the member for Schubert and shows her absolute contempt for our ambulance officers across the state. What we had was the Ambulance Employees Association— The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Minister, there is a point of order from the deputy leader. Mr TEAGUE House of Assembly Heysen Deputy Leader of the Opposition Mr TEAGUE: Standing order 98(a): this is clearly debate from the minister. It was a question directed to the Premier about what the Premier has done, and the minister is choosing to go on ad hominem attacks against members of this place. The question should be answered. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Minister, if you come back to the substance of the question. The Hon. C.J. PICTON House of Assembly Kaurna Minister for Health and Wellbeing The Hon. C.J. PICTON: In relation to this policy, the Ambulance Employees Association had to put out a statement in which they said: The AEA firmly rejects the offensive suggestion made by the shadow minister Ashton Hurn that paramedics and ambulance officers will dump patients at hospitals and run. Our members will always act in the best interests of their patients and will never put patients at risk of harm. This is a government that backs our ambos. This is a government that backs our clinicians. This is a government that listened to the expert recommendation that was made and put in place sensible suggestions. If the opposition want to propose something different, they have the ability to promise that they will do so. The shadow minister was given that invitation on the radio the other day: 'Would you reverse this if you were elected? Would you reverse this?' What did she say? She said, 'I don't have all the information. I couldn't possibly know whether we should reverse it or not.' I thought we were on the cusp of their first policy. I thought we were so close. Members interjecting: The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: The minister will resume his seat. Mr TEAGUE House of Assembly Heysen Deputy Leader of the Opposition Mr TEAGUE: Point of order under standing order 98(a): I seek a ruling on the point of order. The minister has continued to debate the matter and has continued to take up attacks against a member of this place. It is a question directed to the Premier about the review of a policy. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: As I said at the start of question time, interjections breach the standing orders. I have heard the member for Schubert continually interjecting and it is equally against the standing orders for the minister to respond to interjections. So maybe if the interjections stop on this side and the responses to interjections stop on the government side, we may be able to get clearer answers. The minister. The Hon. C.J. PICTON House of Assembly Kaurna Minister for Health and Wellbeing The Hon. C.J. PICTON: So the idea that this is not going to be opposed, that this is not going to be reversed if they were to win at the next election, shows that this is just trying to pick up some dirt, raise this issue without actually any intention or any other proposition, and we are just getting on with the job of implementing what was made to us of some recommendations from eminent clinicians and making sure that we update our policy accordingly.