Nurse and Midwife to Patient Ratios Bill

Committee Stage

In committee.

(Continued from 17 September 2025.)

Clause 17 passed.

Clauses 18 to 20 passed.

Clause 21.

Mrs HURN: In relation to consultation for changing the regulations, can the minister confirm the process that the government will go through? Throughout the bill, there is mention that there is a requirement to consult with the relevant union, that is, the ANMF, but is there a requirement to do so for the change of regulations?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: While there is no formal requirement in the legislation, it would be the government's intention and, certainly from my perspective, commitment that we would consult with the ANMF. This is always something which is closely scrutinised by our friends in the Legislative Review Committee as to what consultation has occurred. I dare say, if the ANMF had not been consulted they would be knocking on doors in the Legislative Council pretty quickly to seek to have some disallowance motion tabled. I think any government would be very minded to make sure they consulted with the ANMF about any regulations.

Clause passed.

Schedule 1.

Mrs HURN: Minister, just for the benefit of the house and members present, can you go through the details as to how the categories were determined?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: The basis, as per previous discussion, is that we have been looking at the Victorian legislation, which has been in place for some time, so seeking a guide from Victoria in terms of the alignment of our hospitals versus their hospitals for where they would fit. That is then layered with a look at factors, such as the number of presentations, the number of beds, the acuity of patients in different hospitals, to reach the categorisations that are set out in the legislation. Of course, that has also been subject to negotiation with the ANMF.

Mrs HURN: Minister, in relation to category 3 and category 4 hospital sites, there have been many contributions, particularly from regional members of parliament, that potentially unforeseen consequences of the ratios could lead to a closure in beds and/or wards if the requisite nurses are not able to get to those regional communities. Can you give a guarantee that no beds or wards will be closed as a result of this bill?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: That is certainly the government's intention. Similarly, at the moment, we have in place nursing hours per patient day already. It is fundamental, when considering this legislation, to understand that beds equal nurses. We cannot open beds unless we have nurses to staff them. That is true as a matter of course, otherwise it would be a completely unsafe proposition. That has always been the case, whether it is Labor governments, Liberal governments, whether this is legislated or not, we need nurses to be able to staff beds across our health system.

That is why we have been so busy making sure that we are increasing our nursing workforce not just in the city areas but across country areas as well. That is a key matter of patient safety. Certainly, our intention, as no doubt all members of the house are aware, is increasing the number of beds across the health system and therefore increasing the workforce. You cannot increase the number of beds unless you also increase the amount of workforce, and that has been fundamental to the work that we have been doing.

Mrs HURN: How will a surge in demand or staff shortages be managed in regional communities with a limited workforce? Obviously, when it comes to the category 1 sites and particularly the category 2 hospital sites, it is much easier to fill any staff vacancies as a result of sickness and the like, but that becomes more and more challenging the more rural and remote you get in South Australia. Can you talk us through what the plan is to manage the surge in demand and any staff shortages?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: Obviously, there are a number of different factors. One, of course, is that we have incentives which are part of our nursing workforce payments for regional areas. The more remote and difficult the area is to recruit to, the higher the incentive is to give to nurses and midwives to work there. That is a fundamental characteristic of what we have as part of our enterprise bargaining agreement already. Obviously, it is subject to further negotiations, which are happening at the moment as part of the nursing workforce enterprise bargaining agreement.

Secondly, as we were talking about yesterday, the hospital teams do everything that they possibly can at the moment in terms of making sure that they can cover the shifts, keep hospitals open and keep those beds open because, whether we pass this legislation or not, they need to be able to staff the beds to open the beds. That is something that happens today and it will happen tomorrow if this legislation is passed.

There are a variety of different mechanisms. If people need to be called in to do an additional shift, sometimes that happens. If we need to use agency staffing, that sometimes happens but, of course, we want to increase the workforce who are staffed employees of SA Health as much as possible. We have had some success with that. Yesterday, we went through the figures of over 200 nurses who we have brought onto the books above the rate of attrition, coming into SA Health in country areas. That has been very positive but there is no doubt there is more that we need to do and we know that there are particular areas, the more remote you get, where those difficulties become more acute.

One that springs to mind is Coober Pedy. Coober Pedy has long been an issue where we have faced workforce shortages. We are doing a number of different things there to try to address that. We are upgrading the accommodation for nurses, which has always been a bit of a substandard accommodation, to be able to bring in nurses to work there. We have also been trialling other methods, including FIFO nurses to Coober Pedy, given its very remote location and how difficult it has been to attract workers who want to live in the Coober Pedy town itself.

That is an extreme example. That is certainly not commonplace across the rest of regional South Australia. Compare it to areas, for instance, such as the Limestone Coast, where we have in place there a nursing school. That is a great opportunity for us to train nurses in the local area to work in the local area. There have been bumps along the way. The previous member for Mount Gambier raised a number of times how we can better support those nurses through their clinical placements. We are working on that to make sure that we can increase that pathway. We have increased substantially the pathway of graduate nurses in the Limestone Coast, for example.

In the Yorke and Northern area, there is another example where we have been working between Yorke and Northern and the Northern Adelaide Local Health Network (NALHN) to better connect those services. This is all about making the training closer to home. This has increased the pipeline of nurses coming into Yorke and Northern because rather than having to conduct a lot of their training, for instance, at the RAH or Flinders, they can conduct as much as possible of it locally in the Yorke and Northern region.

To the extent that some of it needs to happen in a major metropolitan hospital such as at the Lyell McEwin, which is obviously closer to the Yorke and Northern region, this has proved very beneficial for those nurses. The fact that the federal government is now paying for those clinical placements has certainly made it a much better pathway for those nurses. The short answer to the question is we are doing everything that we possibly can and that is irrespective of whether this bill passes or not.

Mrs HURN: Just to be clear, minister, if a ratio is not met in a ward, what is the practical next step? If there is an acknowledgement by the hospital or the leading team on that ward, and there is an acknowledgement that the ratio is not there, what is the next step for that ward or the beds that are there? Do they have a reduction in beds to ensure that there is the requisite number of nurses? What practically happens?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: In the current enterprise bargaining agreement already—and this is from back in 2022—there already is an escalation pathway where the nursing hours per patient day, which are now translating to ratios, cannot be met. There is a local escalation process which includes reallocation of patients, prioritisation of nursing and midwifery activities within the patient care area, deployment of nurses and midwives from other patient care areas, additional hours for part-time staff, overtime and engagement of casual and agency nursing staff. So a combination of those measures are the measures that are used. That is obviously the escalation path when it is understood that the ratio is not being met.

Mrs HURN: Just to be clear: the closure of a bed or a ward is not part of any escalation strategy or pathway?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: No, it is not part of that list that I mentioned. Obviously we would want to make sure that every stop would be taken before that would have to be considered, because patients need to be looked after. For example, we have a lot of nurses who do very important roles but are not necessarily patient-facing, and a reallocation of those activities to be patient-facing in those times when there is particular strain in a particular area is a sensible method that is part of the existing escalation pathway—as well as, of course, overtime, using casual staff, increasing the part-time hours of nurses and using agency nurses.

Mrs HURN: What is the timeframe in terms of that escalation strategy? Say if we go to a regional hospital and a ratio is not there, obviously with all of the items that are listed in the escalation policy a number of those things would take some time to implement. Is there a period of time where it is acceptable to not have a ratio met?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I think most of those things can happen quite quickly. Taking a staff member from a non patient-facing area—whether they are doing training, a management role or an education role—and bringing them to a patient-facing role can happen rapidly. Giving somebody overtime can happen rapidly. So quite a few of those things can happen quite immediately.

Ms PRATT: Minister, in relation to categories, the bill—as per the Health Care Act 2008—gives us a definition of 'incorporated hospital'. None of the hospitals within my electorate of Frome are listed specifically, so they are captured as small country hospitals. What is it about the definition, then, that precludes hospitals like Clare, Jamestown, Burra, Balaklava, Kapunda and Eudunda from being captured in a category?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: There has been work done looking at the exact bed numbers, and the hospitals that have been mentioned are obviously smaller hospitals comparative to the ones that are specifically legislated here. We are just seeing if we can find the exact bed numbers for what you have mentioned, and if we can we will come back to you.

Mr TELFER: Thank you, minister, for looking with us especially as local members to try to understand this bill, which is introducing nurse to patient ratios, on behalf of our communities. Obviously as the member for Flinders I am interested in what ramifications there might be or what potential there might be for my community.

Looking at the category 3 hospital sites and the Port Lincoln Health Service, the one on that list that is the furthest away from Adelaide, can you provide some reassurance, some confidence, to my community that having these ratios in place is not going to put at risk any of the existing services or the existing bed numbers? It is, as I said, the hospital that is the most remote as far as distance from Adelaide goes. Can you provide some certainty for my community that this is not going to have a negative impact on those who rely on the Port Lincoln Hospital and Health Service for their ongoing health needs?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I can, and I would in fact argue that this will have a benefit to the Port Lincoln community. To the extent that the member is worried about risks, those risks exist whether or not this legislation is passed, because we have commitments already in terms of nursing hours per patient day. This will make it clearer. This will make it easier. This will mean, I think, that the staff have a much clearer understanding of the ratios that will need to be in place and the methods that will need to happen to make sure that they can be met. For patients, hopefully that will mean a better experience overall, and safer staffing for the staff who work at Port Lincoln as well.

Mr TELFER: I think I have 10 hospitals in my electorate, obviously one here that has been categorised as a category 3. With the remaining, can you give me an insight into what, if anything, this legislation means for those smaller communities? We obviously have some hospitals that have smaller bed numbers but we have some more significant health-needs communities, such as Ceduna. Can you give me an idea as to the categorisation, and what the expectations are on those hospitals that are not categorised? I am thinking Tumby Bay, Cummins, Streaky Bay, but also Ceduna, which is a real health hub for the far west and for the Indigenous communities which rely on that health service.

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: Firstly, I do acknowledge the member has a lot of hospitals. I have visited them all, as I have visited every hospital in South Australia, and there are some incredible hospitals in some very remote locations across the state with staff doing amazing work. To get into category 4—and this goes back to the question that was raised earlier, and we have been able to find the categorisation in answer to the member for Frome's question—hospitals have between 25 and 29 inpatient beds and they also include specialty services such as accident and emergency, chemotherapy and surgical services; and they staff their accident emergency service separately and in addition to the inpatient areas. They set those hospitals apart from the smaller hospitals that do not fit into category 4.

There are a variety of different hospitals that fit into category 4. Obviously Ceduna hospital, which is one that has been mentioned, is much bigger than Cleve hospital for example. We are doing some further work looking at this, and in conjunction with ANMF in terms of whether there are any other hospitals that may well in the future need to be part of category 4, and I would have thought Ceduna would be one of those ones that we are looking at.

In terms of the very small hospitals, say, for example, Cleve, the one-plus-one staffing, which is essentially taken from what currently is the practice and is brought into this legislation would apply and, of course, this legislation is also consistent with the aged-care federal rules that apply in terms of staffing requirements as well, so I would not anticipate any change for those staffing models.

The other thing to say is that, even for a hospital in the category of Ceduna, where we have additional staffing requirements as part of the enterprise bargaining agreement already, they are preserved. As I mentioned yesterday, no one is going backwards in terms of what staffing they would have, and so if Ceduna hospital has particular requirements that we have as part of the EB already, that will be maintained irrespective of whether they are a category 4 hospital in the legislation.

Mr ELLIS: I have a couple of questions around the categories as well. By way of background, the minister will be well aware that I have been battling to increase the size of Wallaroo Hospital for some time, and I just have a few questions around its categorisation. Firstly, you have just outlined that category 4 hospitals are between 25 and 29 inpatient beds. My understanding is that the Wallaroo Hospital is only funded for 21 beds. It often runs at a higher number than that because there are some beds left over from the shutting of the private hospital that it often used, but I just want to confirm the number of beds funded at the Wallaroo Hospital as being 21.

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I will take that on notice.

Mr ELLIS: The other follow-up question I have on that front is that I have been calling, and it features as part of the health petition that was tabled in this place some time ago, for Wallaroo to be lifted to a comparable standard to the Port Pirie hospital. We often feel on the YP that it is a secondary hospital and that Port Pirie is a major hub for our LHN. I personally would like to see that rectified. The fact that Wallaroo is listed as a category 4 hospital and will therefore have a lesser ratio than Port Pirie as a category 3 hospital once this becomes law would seem to be supportive of the fact that it is a lesser hospital.

I ask for confirmation on that front because, in reference to the health petition inquiry that we had and the hearing in Yorketown specifically, we had the CEO of the local health network down there, Roger Kirchner, who said:

Also Wallaroo and Port Pirie, from a service delivery point of view, actually do the same level and care of services. I believe that Port Pirie is slightly higher in chemo…

The CEO of our local health network has them operating at the same level, but this bill has them at different categories and thereby different ratios, and thereby Wallaroo has a lesser level of nurse coverage.

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: Firstly, I acknowledge the member's unwavering advocacy on behalf of Wallaroo Hospital and on behalf of other hospitals on Yorke Peninsula as well. I would not characterise it as the member has—that a different category in this therefore leads to a different level of service—but it is a reflection of the current status in terms of, as we said, bed numbers, presentations, etc. I think it can be well anticipated that over time we will see Wallaroo Hospital grow. The population will see growth on Yorke Peninsula, and I certainly would regard it as an area where we will see growth in the level of activity that the state government deploys to SA Health to deliver at Wallaroo Hospital.

As the member knows, I have not accepted his proposition that it is a sort of either/or proposition for Wallaroo versus Port Pirie, and nor have I accepted the proposition that changing the boundaries of the local health network would lead to some significant changes in terms of healthcare provision for Wallaroo Hospital or the people on Yorke Peninsula more broadly. That is obviously a matter which is now being considered by our colleagues on the Economic and Finance Committee of the parliament.

So, in terms of legislation, I think it is an accurate reflection of where those categorisations of hospitals, based on the nursing numbers, need to be. But that is not to give or take anything away in terms of the fact that I agree with the member that Wallaroo Hospital is an area where growth will need to happen in the future.

Mr ELLIS: If growth does occur in the not-too-distant future, and it is made to be a bigger hospital with a significantly larger number of beds, will it require the passage of an amendment bill through both houses of this parliament to lift it from category 4 to whatever category it might well rise to?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: No, we will be able to do that through regulation.

Mr PEDERICK: Noting that Murray Bridge hospital is a category 3 hospital, has the minister completed any modelling that shows what staff requirements will be needed to keep it fully staffed across all shifts? By that I mean modelling around full-time nurses, agency nurses and the need for interstate agency nurses to fill shifts.

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: Similar to the previous questions I have answered, we have nursing hours per patient day requirements at the moment. Those need to be met by our local health networks, and there is a variety of different mechanisms to do that. We have increased staffing, we have ambitions to do that even more, and we are improving the work that we do in terms of the recruitment of graduate nurses into South Australia. We are very ambitious in that regard.

The other thing to say is that there is a two-year transition in terms of this legislation. We would expect all our local health networks to have their own local plans about their implementation of this, and making sure that they have the appropriate number of staff is a key requirement that they have not only now but also into the future for when this legislation comes in at the end of that transition period.

Mr PEDERICK: With that answer, can you guarantee that no beds will be shut at Murray Bridge, with the proposition being that 86 more nurses will be trained, and obviously there will be access to agency nurses?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: There is certainly no intention at all to close beds in Murray Bridge. In fact, I would imagine that, over the course of years, there would be an increase in the service provision that we have in Murray Bridge, given the growth of population that is expected as part of the Greater Adelaide Regional Plan. As I mentioned before, whether or not this legislation is passed, to have beds we need nurses, so we will need to make sure we have the requisite number of nurses to meet growing need, and that is true whether or not we pass this legislation.

Mr PEDERICK: In regard to my two other hospitals at Strathalbyn and Mannum being smaller hospitals and quite necessary for those communities, what guarantees can the minister give that they will always have the required level of service under this plan? From what I understand, because they are not listed, they will be in the smaller hospital category.

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: There is no change to the current requirements, so either there is the minimum staffing requirements for those hospitals or, if there is a higher level of provision in the current nursing enterprise bargaining agreement, then there would be the same staffing that would currently be the requirement for those hospitals.

Mr BASHAM: My question is around the management within a hospital. It is a while since I have been inside the Southern Fleurieu Health Service hospital, particularly since the private hospital has been absorbed into the public hospital. With the operation of the wards and the nursing ratios, for example, historically certainly—and I am not sure whether that is still the case—the antenatal ward is a separate ward to the surgical ward, and often there can only be one midwife in the antenatal ward. Is it possible that that midwife can nurse in the side-by-side ward and be counted in those ratios for both?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I think the short answer is no, it is a shift by shift, area by area work, and the only complication would be the passage of the section that we had yesterday in terms of mixed wards. That is the only complication there, and there are obviously separate provisions about those.

Mr BASHAM: If that is the case, having one midwife in there, for example, would you see patients then being moved into the antenatal ward to become a mixed ward for a period of time so that the nursing needs are spread without actually having to resource both wards?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I do not think that is the intention at all. We obviously talked a little bit yesterday about how the mixed ward arrangements would work, and there are particular requirements in terms of consultation and consideration that need to be put in place in terms of changes to those mixed wards. I can see what the member is trying to suggest, but I do not think that that is an accurate representation.

Ms PRATT: Minister, previously you answered my question about the hospitals that are not captured in the four categories, so the small country hospitals. Was your response that a review will be undertaken or is being considered in terms of those hospitals and perhaps a reclassification of them at some point in the future? For example, Clare Hospital. You can hear that country MPs are passionate about the hospitals in their electorates.

I would argue that Clare is uniquely positioned as a hospital supporting a larger catchment. It is benefiting from $7.29 million worth of upgrade investment from the government. Ageing populations will require that we preserve the small country hospitals that we have and not lose them. I am concerned that by them not being listed specifically within their own category they will be invisible within this act. However, were you suggesting previously that a review of those categories of small country hospitals is likely in the future?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: The short answer is yes, we are doing some more work on that. I think you can pick up my answer in terms of Ceduna and apply it to Clare. As I said, having visited every country hospital in the state, I think Ceduna and Clare are probably the ones that stand out on this list as not being included, so I suspect they will be the ones that we have a close look at.

Mrs HURN: With your indulgence, sir—otherwise, I am happy to hand my questions to the member for Heysen. That might take a little bit longer.

The CHAIR: I am glad you said that.

Mrs HURN: He agrees with me. I just note there are seven pages for schedule 1, and it is quite a complicated—

The CHAIR: And I have been very patient.

Mrs HURN: I am happy to hand the questions over to the member for Heysen.

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: We are all agreed.

Mrs HURN: Thank you very much for indulgence on this matter. Picking up on the small hospitals, particularly in relation to Tanunda and Angaston in my own local community, can you just potentially take on notice, minister, if you do not have this information at hand, how many beds are currently funded at both of those hospitals? In addition, I put on the record the concern that, at the Tanunda hospital particularly, there has been a reduction in bed numbers due to the inability to attract nurses, so that is a risk that has already been seen played out in my own local community. Do you have any comments on that or guarantees that there will not be a further reduction?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: Firstly, can I thank the member for sparing us. This is a 46 to one issue of agreement—or 45 to one at the moment. I will certainly take that matter on notice. I am aware of the local concerns in terms of the two Barossa hospitals on a number of fronts. It is something I am actively raising regularly with the CEO of the Barossa Hills Fleurieu Local Health Network, and I am happy to get you an answer between the houses on that.

Mr TELFER: Minister, reflecting on the answers that you have given some of the other regional members, can you also provide, whether that be now or on notice, how many beds are funded at the hospitals that are not categorised under categories 1 to 4, being Tumby Bay, Cleve Cowell, Kimba, Cummins, Elliston, Wudinna, Streaky Bay and Ceduna?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I am happy to take that on notice.

Ms PRATT: Minister, reflecting on part 2 and the breakdown of wards, where we see acute stroke, antenatal birthing suites, etc., were mental health nurses considered as requiring their own clause, if you like? If not, can you explain how that nursing ratio applies in country hospitals?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: Mental health is not part of this legislation, as the member has reflected upon. That is, I understand, consistent with Victoria. There is current variability in terms of the models of care and the models that different mental health units have in terms of their staffing. It is not just, of course, nursing staffing in mental health; allied health plays a key role in terms of mental health as well, not to mention medical staffing as well. No doubt, it is fair to say, it is something that the ANMF are keen to further consider into the future and will be subject to further work down the track.

Ms PRATT: Chair, if you will allow a supplementary along that theme of how the wards are broken down: in regard to the birthing suites, how confident are you, minister, that where we see workforce shortages with midwives this bill will strengthen the availability of midwives to staff and be on shift for birthing suites, where without them we see the diversion of those services in rural health?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I am always envious of ministers who have the ability to make things happen by legislation alone. That certainly is not the case in the health portfolio. I do not think anyone is representing the fact that the passage of this legislation is going to suddenly address every issue. What it is going to do is set the criteria that need to be put in place, and to a large degree they reflect criteria which are in place in many places across our health system at the moment. It will make it clearer and it will put more emphasis on our staff putting in place plans to make sure that they deliver upon that safer staffing in birthing, in general medicine and in a whole range of areas across our state.

We have gone through the process where we were in dire straits in Whyalla, and a huge amount of work has had to happen to now get Whyalla back up and operational. The member for Giles and I some months ago visited the team at Whyalla Hospital. It is an absolutely incredible team of midwives that we have there, who are now delivering more babies than was the case before the suspension of services, in a better unit and with better services.

It is certainly not legislation that delivers that outcome. It is a lot of hard work from the team, and no doubt a fair bit of money as well. This sets the guidance, this sets the framework of what needs to happen, but it is up to those hardworking public servants across our health system. We now have 50,000 people working for SA Health to put this into reality.

Schedule passed.

The CHAIR: Just for the record, there were 21 questions allowed on that schedule.

Schedule 2.

Mrs HURN: Regarding schedule 2, part 2, in relation to the transitional provision, obviously the moratorium period is two years. Can you explain, for the benefit of the house, why it is two years? Was that at the request of the ANMF? Would you like to see this come into effect earlier? Just talk us through that.

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I think we certainly regard it as important to have a period of transition for this legislation to come into place, to make sure that all the local health networks can gear up and have plans put in place to make it happen. It obviously was a matter of negotiation between us and the ANMF, as per other sections in this legislation. They can speak for themselves, but the advice that I have is that they wanted to make sure that we had a date on which this all switched on. There have been some other models where you sort of switch on hospital by hospital, ward by ward. What we have negotiated here is an outcome where this will all come on in two years' time across all the system that is affected by the legislation.

Mrs HURN: This is potentially supplementary, but could the minister just explain in a little bit more detail about the plans that the LHNs will need to put in place for the ratio? What is the government's plan to communicate with all of the LHNs and all of the hospitals so that they understand what this bill means to ensure the ratios are met?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: Firstly, they are certainly aware already of the legislation coming to the parliament—and hello to anybody from our local health networks who is listening to the live stream. All of our local health networks are already working, in terms of their staffing and their workforce planning, at their local level to make sure that they are sustainable. They are already recruiting very significant numbers of graduate nurses but also experienced nurses into the system.

But this, no doubt, will also be another piece of work that they will be undertaking at the local level to make sure that they meet these requirements and are geared up over the course of those two years. I would well expect that we would see health networks geared up well before those two years to have this in operation, but certainly by the end of those two years. This gives them the right amount of notice to have those plans in place.

The CHAIR: Member for Heysen, you have a further question. Have your colleagues approved this?

Mr TEAGUE: I am certainly very happy to join in with the sentiments earlier expressed. I am looking to continually improve. This sort of takes us back to clause 17, and at least I will just refer to that for the minister's convenience. The moratorium period is two years, and subclause (2) says that a person cannot apply during the moratorium period—so that is all clear.

My question is: by reference to clause 17(3)—the evidence provision that we sort of dealt with last time—is conduct of that nature that is 'expressly, tacitly or impliedly authorised', etc., and deliberate and so on, that occurs during the moratorium period that leads to a claim after the two years going to be admissible as evidence, or is the impugned behaviour constituting the offence having to occur after the end of the moratorium period as well in order to constitute that claim that cannot come until schedule 2, clause 2(2) says, two years down the track?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: Thank you to the member for Heysen for his question. He is welcome to ask questions at any time, of course, despite his colleagues trying to stop him. The advice to me is that might well be something that lawyers could sit around and come to different interpretations on, potentially. But I think there are a couple of things to note: one is that what is in part 4, clause 17(4)(a), the matters to which the court would have regard, would obviously be considered as part of that.

The other factor is that if there was a contravention up until this coming into place, then there are already provisions under the nursing enterprise bargaining agreement for an escalation of those matters as well, so we would expect the ANMF or others to raise them under those provisions.

Mr TEAGUE: I am sure that answer helps the committee and then those who have to interpret. The point to underscore here is that it is not the intention of the government to go ahead and give all of these hospitals a kind of two-year pause, obviously. They are all working on compliance straightaway, and it is not to be expected somehow that at the two-year mark they are meeting the criteria or else. It would appear to me, as just one humble member of the committee, that it would be a retrograde step if there was any kind of interpretation of all this that says, 'As long as you have your house in order two years down the track, everything else that happens before is a clean slate.' If there is a capacity to interrogate what happens in the two years to come then it seems that that is clause 17 doing its work.

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: In terms of that I would refer you to this schedule's part 2, clause 2(4):

An incorporated hospital must act in good faith and take all reasonable measures to comply with a ratio or minimum staffing requirement during the moratorium period.

Schedule passed.

Title passed.

Bill reported without amendment.

Third Reading

The Hon. C.J. PICTON (Kaurna—Minister for Health and Wellbeing) (12:51): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.