House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Second Session (51-2)
2008-06-05 Daily Xml

Contents

PATIENT ASSISTED TRANSPORT SCHEME

Mrs PENFOLD (Flinders) (14:37): My question is again to the Minister for Health. Will the government revise and raise the PATS (Patient Assisted Transport Scheme) reimbursement so that it reflects increases in costs associated with country people accessing medical attention?

A constituent who requires monthly specialist eye treatment is considering dropping the treatment and subsequently losing his sight because of the cost. He chooses to fly, because it is the cheapest option for him as it avoids the necessity of an overnight stay in Adelaide (it is unwise to drive for some hours after treatment), and he spends as little time away from work as possible so that his income is not further disadvantaged. He believes the reimbursement from PATS, which he appreciates, does not adequately deal with the current situation regarding costs and travel options. He points out that a visit to his eye specialist costs him $300 to $350, without including the doctor's charges, while a metropolitan resident can access the same treatment for as little as $10.

The Hon. J.D. HILL (Kaurna—Minister for Health, Minister for the Southern Suburbs, Minister Assisting the Premier in the Arts) (14:39): I thank the member for the question. It is an important question. I can inform the house about a range of things that we are doing. I answered this in part in relation to the question that the member for Stuart asked me. The first thing we are doing is introducing a country health plan which will provide more services close to where people live. That seems to me to be the fundamentally most important thing we can do.

Something like 45 per cent of the money we spend on acute services for country people is spent in city hospitals, so there is a capacity, we believe, to transfer some of that resource back into country settings. Clearly, you cannot do that in every hospital but we have identified a range of hospitals where we can do that. The Port Lincoln hospital in the member's electorate is one of those sites where we want to expand services—

Ms Chapman interjecting:

The Hon. J.D. HILL: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition may wish to ask questions about this. That is fine. She may have a view that we should not expand services in the country. That is also fine.

She is entitled to campaign on that belief in the country and the city, anywhere she likes, but in our view it makes sense to put more services in country settings so that people who have needs can have them addressed closer to where they are. That is our commitment because we want to improve the health of country people. In relation to the PAT Scheme, originally it was the responsibility of the commonwealth government. I find it interesting that the opposition only asks questions about this when Labor is in power. They were in government for eight years and, to the best of my knowledge, did nothing to improve this system.

Mrs Penfold: You left us bankrupt.

The Hon. J.D. HILL: The old cry. The excuse for every single inaction in the eight years they were in government. Their excuse for everything. They cut through the services in the health system like a knife going through butter, cut back services everywhere in the South Australian health services and it is this government that is rebuilding the health services. We are attempting to get a better way of spending the available PATS funding.

Unfortunately, the member for Goyder is not here today, but he would be pleased to tell members that he has written to me, enthusiastically supporting a trial in country health transport that has just finished over on Yorke Peninsula. We are evaluating that trial to see if we can use the available funds to get a better outcome for people. I also understand that the current federal Labor government is examining the whole PATS issue as well, so a few things are being done which should help country South Australians.