The current government option to re-build the RAH on a prime piece of real estate without going through a full consultation process is arrogance at it's best. This is a major project estimated to be around $2 billion dollars of taxpayers money, yet there has been little consultation or debate to date.

What are they trying to achieve? While the debate has been purposely manipulated as to whether we require to upgrade the RAH or build new, the real debate should be focused on what are the issues with the health system and how can you best spend $2 billion dollars to fix those problems.

The issues with our health system are many and include:

Excessive waiting periods for emergency, surgical procedures, specialist appointments
A private health system which is under utilised running alongside a public system that is congested.
Unreasonable timeframe of upto 2 weeks when making appointments to see local GP (particularly in the suburbs)
A centralised health care system forcing many in the suburbs to travel long distances for basic medical needs
High occupancy rates, overcrowing in hospitals , quick turnover and a general lack of medical staff such as doctors, nurses,.
Beurocracy causing in-efficiencies which add to the cost of healthcare too many admin staff or non essential resources.

The proposed option by this government does little to rectify any of the issue listed, which raises the question why do it. At best the new hospital will generate 100 additional beds at a cost of $20 million per bed, it will not generate additional nurses and doctors, it will not lower waiting periods for medical procedures, patients in the suburbs will still have to travel for medical care.

The solution is to develop a long term vision for healthcare that predominantly focuses on de-centralisation. Politicalfixit propose new major hospitals in the suburbs attracting additional doctors and nurses and removing congestion at neighbouring facilities. The Flinders hospital has been servicing the southern suburbs for over 30 years, yet the population has climbed dramatically without any substantial investment in major hospitals. If the government have $2 billion to spend we would suggest a $1 billion hospital in the Southern suburbs and $1 billion hospital strategically positioned to remove pressure from neighbouring hospital, with a gradual upgrdade to the RAH on it's present site. The other issue associated with this debate is the use of prime real estate which belongs to you the taxpayer. Dont you think that it would be appropriate to ask the owners of the land how they would like to see it utilised, maybe an entertainment precinct thriving with cafes, alfresco dining, and sports stadium. Our great political leaders need to understand that a democratic system does not give them ownership of our assetts to do what they desire without true consultation, we are not convinced that a hospital is the best purpose for this real estate.

The recent Tom Koutsantonis debarcle has again clearly displayed how governments protect their own and lack consistency. This issue hit a raw nerve with the electorate and caused an unprecendented community outcry. Radio stations and media outlets were bombarded with comments that were not favourable to the government, yet in a true display of arrogance they attempted to play it down. The premiere had the audacity to state on radio that he felt that his minister had done a good job during his short tenure - the mind boggles. If this had been a member of the general public would the government have been as compassionate - I think not!

Tom Koutsantonis did nothing but be critical of young drivers and threaten more harsh laws which have clearly not worked, he also managed to raise the bar on hoon driving, and raise awareness on accepting fines on behalf of family members. It was laughable at best watching a Premier trying to play down nearly 60 expiation notices.

The integrity of this ambitious minister has to be questioned, in our view for a position of such stature non disclosure of information by the minister is as good as lying and his feeble attempt to dodge the bullets was weak at best.
 
As at 18th June the represenation of young fatalities on our road is around 46% of the total, which is double what it was before this government started playing around with laws which disqualify huge numbers of novice drivers for minor traffic infringments at a critical point in their development. It then returns them back to the road 6 - 12 months later and they have to start all over again.

A system that allows a person to remain on the road with such an appaling driving record yet can disqualify a novice driver for a single offence is clearly unjust. The general public must not tolerate this hypocrisy.

Having just spent 12 months driving a young family member to & from work, to prevent him becoming a centrelink recipient for offences that pailed into significance compared to the ministers, it hit a raw nerve for me. Many young drivers who have been disqualified for much less deserve an apology from this government

This minister should have been sacked from playing any part in government he showed his colours early.

"The government options simply makes no sense and lacks vision - we need to fix the problems with the health system not build the Taj Mahal

Home

About Us

Articles

Campaigns

Surveys

Blog

My Community

Contact Us