HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2009-05-12 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Grievance Debate

HEALTH POLICY

Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (15:18): Yesterday, I received a letter from the Department of the Premier and Cabinet signed by Chris Eccles, Chief Executive. If ever there was another act of the government attempting to gag the people of South Australia, and now members of parliament, which is bordering on interference with parliamentary privilege, I suggest, it is this. It is a letter from Mr Eccles asking that any further complaint or statement that I have to make in respect of a public servant—in particular, Dr David Panter—should be raised with the chief executive of the department or 'if it is more acceptable to you', he suggests, the Commissioner of Public Employment, Mr Warren McCann.

He claims in this letter that—and this is very important—'as you know, public servants are unable to comment and reply to such public criticisms'. Let me explain to Mr Eccles what the situation is. Dr David Panter is a senior employee in the Department of Health. In fact, I met him a number of years ago in 2006, I think, shortly after I took over shadow health responsibilities. He was then the head of the Central Northern Health Service. He seemed like a reasonable fellow and he provided a briefing in respect of the area of responsibility he had. What is really important is that since that time the minister has elevated him to two areas of responsibility that I can think of immediately. One is the country health plan. What a monumental disaster that was! He was the architect of that. Now, of course, we have—

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: Mr Speaker, I have a point of order. Sir, I find it very sad that the deputy leader would attack a public servant who is doing an outstanding job and is incapable of defending himself—

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: It is weak and gutless.

The SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. The Deputy Premier will take his seat.

The Hon. K.O. Foley interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! The deputy leader.

Ms CHAPMAN: It is the government's responsibility to make policy decisions. It is the responsibility, obviously, of those in the Public Service to carry that out. However, when the Treasurer interrupts with words such as 'gutless', it brings to mind how many occasions on which the minister has been missing on policy matters on health. Who is trotted out? Dr David Panter. He is the poor peanut who is sent out to the public to have to present—

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: Mr Speaker, I have a point of order.

Ms CHAPMAN: —to the public a government decision about—

The SPEAKER: Order! There is a point of order. The Deputy Premier.

The Hon. K.O. FOLEY: Mr Speaker, it is not appropriate that a senior public servant going about his or her work should be referred to as a peanut by the deputy leader. I ask her to withdraw and apologise to Mr Panter.

The SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. The deputy leader.

Ms CHAPMAN: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I repeat: it is the government that is being gutless when it sends out public servants not only to bat for it but also to explain its policy (which is perfectly reasonable and there is that expectation that they will do that because it is what they are paid to do). However, in the case of the $1.7 billion Royal Adelaide Hospital, the government hides away and presents a senior public servant as the architect of the proposal—and Dr Panter is sent out to discuss it on radio and advocate for it, and to public meetings at hospitals. Most recently, I can think of a public meeting with Dr Jim Katsaros, about which an allegation has been made, by me, which I stand by, that there had been an instruction by Dr Panter's office not to allow members of the public to attend a certain meeting. We say that was an attempt to silence the publication of information about an important policy decision of the government, and we say that is unacceptable.

If the government says, 'We knew nothing about that. We did not give that instruction. That was not our policy. We did not decide to do that and he was acting out of order,' let it come out and say it. However, if it was on the government's instruction (as we must presume, because a senior public servant was the spokesperson and, as the architect of this plan, advocated publicly for it), let the government members have the courage to come out and say, 'We instructed them to do it.' The government cannot send out public servants to do its job while the ministers hide away in their little castles. That is not acceptable. The government expects that members of the opposition—including me as health spokesperson—will be silent. We will not be silent. We want some answers from the government on this.

Time expired.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT