Roxon wrong on health job

Posted Sep 24, 2009 11:13am

I have for months patiently borne the repetitive inaccurate rants of the Federal Health Minister. From soon after her appointment, Nicola Roxon, has gone to great lengths to lay complete and full blame for our nation's woefully inadequate health system at the feet of the Howard Government.

Each and every time she has risen to speak in the Parliament or addressed the media, the Minister has made factually incorrect and blatantly false statements regarding the burden of responsibility as it relates to our health system.

Please humour me while I lay bare the absurdity of these claims.

To make it perfectly clear, as the nation's Federal Government, the Howard Government was not responsible for the provision of health services. As Minister, former Health boss Tony Abbott was not responsible for the provision of health services. As Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd is not responsible for the provision of health services – just as he is not for schools. As Federal Health Minister, Nicola Roxon is not responsible for the provision of health services.

This honour, or burden depending upon your view, sits squarely on the shoulders of state governments. Let me reiterate for the Minister … the provision of health services is the responsibility of state governments. As anyone with two eyes will know, any inadequacies or maladministration is also the responsibility of state governments. Peter Beattie and Anna Bligh in my case in Queensland. Not John Howard.

As most Australians know, our health system is made of several not so well connected individual systems. Each state and territory of Australia runs its own health system and each state government is responsible for the formulation and implementation of health policy relative to the health needs of their state.

The role of our Federal Government in this process is little more than a sugar daddy. It does not currently, nor has it ever, had the power to run hospitals or state health systems. For some years, due mainly to poor fiscal management by the states, the Commonwealth has made what is called Specific Purpose Payments or tied grants. For this, Section 96 of the Australian Constitution makes provision. However, it does not state the Commonwealth is responsible for the system itself, just that it has power to offer funding if it deems necessary.

Significant structural amendments and policy leadership must come from state governments. Around the country in the last decade, these have been of the Labor persuasion. And therein lies the truth.

When a side of politics holds one level of government and their opposing party holds the other, each has an out clause … a little brother to blame when the vase gets knocked over if you will.

But when the same party holds power across the board, they’re buggered; they are an only child and the neighbour’s kids aren't visiting.

If you follow Roxon's notion to its logical conclusion you'd find something like this … let's say my father borrowed me money when I was 17 to buy a new ute. I bought a whiz bang vehicle and was very excited. However, instead of decking it out to complete my apprenticeship and get a trade, I loaded it with all my mates, went hooning down the road and crashed. No trade, no ute, no prospects.

In Roxon's notion, some how this would be my father's fault. Well he paid for it after all. What rubbish. If I were to engage in that behaviour, such an accident and waste of thousands of dollars would be solely my responsibility. How then, if Beattie took the cash and blew it is he any different?

He isn't and neither is his replacement.

That such a basic and fundamental fact has not been raised and pushed by the media and other public figures is just sad. It was Rudd who claimed he would end the blame game on health if elected and now it is his government indulging in this childish and unproductive behaviour.