HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)
2023-03-22 Daily Xml
Contents
Xml

Limestone Coast Cancer Services

The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI (Leader of the Opposition) (14:26): My question is to the Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development. Given that the minister is a local community member of the Limestone Coast, has she signed the petition for radiotherapy services in the Limestone Coast?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN (Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development, Minister for Forest Industries) (14:26): I thank the honourable member for her question. This is an interesting question—

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: —because this relates to a decision that I'm advised was taken two years ago when we had both a federal Liberal government and a state Liberal government. My advice—

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order! Order on both sides! Minister, please continue.

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: My advice is that funds were made available for radiation therapy and Mount Gambier was among those locations that were identified as possibilities for such a service. I am advised that there was a tender put out and there was one applicant for that tender but that tender was unsuccessful.

Following that, the local health board—and health boards, let us remember, were established by the former state Liberal government to ensure that decision-making was made close to the regional areas. If those opposite don't want health boards to do what they were established to do, I wonder why they didn't say so when they were established under the former state Liberal government. However, as I'm advised, the health board negotiated to have that funding instead go towards upgrades to cancer care in the Limestone Coast, including upgrades or expansions to chemo.

My question would be: are those opposite—and indeed the member for Barker, who has since started this whole campaign—suggesting that we should have radiotherapy and not have expansion—

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: —to other cancer care, including chemo? So the question—

The Hon. N.J. Centofanti interjecting:

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: There is one pot of money.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order! Minister, sit down.

The Hon. R.P. Wortley: Their behaviour is outrageous.

The PRESIDENT: The Hon. Mr Wortley, you are not helping. I can't hear the answer and this is obviously a very serious question and a very serious topic. I want to hear the minister's answer. Minister, please continue.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Order!

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: The question needs to be asked: do those opposite not want the expansion of chemo? Do they not want the upgrade of other cancer care, because that is what the money is being used for, as negotiated by the health board and, as I understand it, the local health network.

The member for Barker had a forum in December about this matter. My advice is that at that forum Mr Grant King agreed that they would revisit the decision, remembering this is a decision that was made possibly up to two years earlier, and at that time those opposite or indeed the member for Barker didn't suddenly object to the way that the funds were being negotiated. They undertook to have a look again, if further information was provided by the body that was now proposing to provide such a service. So if those opposite want to advocate against the improvements to other cancer care, then perhaps they should say so.

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