Thursday, 10 February 2022

Elective surgery

Mr GUY (Bulleen—Leader of the Opposition) (14:19): My question is to the Minister for Health. On 13 January this year Paul from rural Tolmie, who suffers from motor neurone disease, required critical surgery to assist his eating ability but was denied private health treatment at St Vincent’s Private. The government’s code brown prohibited this procedure from being undertaken despite a private surgeon agreeing to perform the surgery using the private hospital facilities. This resulted in the deterioration of his health to the point where the surgical procedure is no longer viable. If facilities were available, surgeons were available and nursing staff were available, what was the harm in letting this man get the surgery he needed at the time it was most vital for his health?

Mr FOLEY (Albert Park—Minister for Health, Minister for Ambulance Services, Minister for Equality) (14:20): I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question. I think the Leader of the Opposition said that 13 January was when this matter was with St Vincent’s Private, if I heard that correctly, and I think the Leader of the Opposition referenced that being the result of the code brown declaration. It may come as a shock to the Leader of the Opposition, but the code brown declaration did not come in until 19 January, so it always pays to check your facts before you get up in this place and make accusations about what does and does not happen. You might always think that the basics should be done as to what you are accusing someone of doing.

But allowing for that error on the part of the Leader of the Opposition, the Leader of the Opposition does touch on a very important issue, which he has touched on on a number of occasions over the course of this week, and that is the implications of the COVID-19 global pandemic right across our healthcare system, be it our public health services, our private health services or indeed our primary healthcare services. In that regard the record numbers of positive cases that we have seen of COVID-19, in the hundreds of thousands of the omicron variant, have had a huge impact right across our healthcare system, including—I know from discussions between my department and St Vincent’s Private—the private hospital system. Can I say how well St Vincent’s have actually done with both their public and their private arms in the course of responding to that global pandemic. It is nonetheless an inescapable point of truth that what has happened as a result of that global pandemic is that the most unwell people have needed support along the way.

Members interjecting.

The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Gembrook can leave the chamber for the period of 1 hour.

Member for Gembrook withdrew from the chamber.

Mr FOLEY: That has seen some 43 000 public patients admitted for care in our private partners’ services, including St Vincent’s. They have done an extraordinary job, but even at the height of a global pandemic which saw hundreds of thousands of cases and thousands of healthcare workers furloughed, even the great work that St Vincent’s do—

Mr Walsh: On a point of order, Speaker, during the 30 seconds of the 4 minutes left could the minister please address the question and tell Paul, if the doctors were available, the nurses were available and the hospital could do the surgery, why couldn’t he get that surgery when he was in a condition when it could be done?

The SPEAKER: Order! The minister is being relevant to what was a broad question.

Mr FOLEY: A very broad question. In those circumstances it is not just a question of having support on the surgical wards, which was actually problematic at that period of time anyway. You have also got to have the support staff once you are out of the surgical facility. And guess what? Those nurses in particular were, more than any other group, furloughed in record numbers.

Mr GUY (Bulleen—Leader of the Opposition) (14:24): Noting Paul’s referral on 13 January for surgery in late January, he is now too weak to have this surgery and is being visited by palliative care nurses. Minister, why has it come to this? Why is a Victorian who needed urgent surgery scheduled for late January and whose doctor was able to perform it but banned by the government from doing so now facing end-of-life care because the government banned surgery that was able to be conducted?

Mr FOLEY (Albert Park—Minister for Health, Minister for Ambulance Services, Minister for Equality) (14:25): As I understand the honourable Leader of the Opposition’s supplementary question in the context of his primary question, the issue of banning surgery through a code brown was not in place at that time. What was in place at that time was the application of the national partnership agreement that allowed the public and the private systems to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic, and that has seen a substantial dislocation and deferral of really important surgeries whilst at the same time the continuation of the important category 1—

Mr Walsh: On a point of order, Speaker, Paul does not really care about the national partnership agreement. He and his wife actually care about the fact that he could not get the surgery when it was required.

The SPEAKER: Order! I ask the Leader of The Nationals what his point of order is.

Mr Walsh: Could I ask you to bring the minister back to answering the question from the Leader of the Opposition, please, and to show some respect to Paul and his wife.

The SPEAKER: Order! The minister is being relevant to the question that has been put.

Mr FOLEY: No-one wants to see these measures in place for one moment longer than they need to be. They are in fact already being eased, and we have a 50 per cent return in private hospital day surgery arrangements at the moment. These measures will be in place for not a moment longer than they need to be.