6. Hon TONY RYALL (National—Bay of Plenty) Link to this
to the Minister of Health
How many patients does he expect this financial year will be removed from waiting lists for a first specialist assessment and returned to their GP for ongoing care, and how does this compare with the previous year?
Hon JIM ANDERTON (Associate Minister of Health) Link to this
In the time available, I have been advised by 18 out of the 21 district health boards that about 10,000 people so far this year have been returned to their general practitioner for ongoing care, which the Ministry of Health advises me is broadly comparable with the number last year. Those 10,000 people represent about 2.5 percent of the more than 400,000 New Zealanders who have been seen by a specialist this year.
The district health board authorities and commissions have taken the view that they have a certain number of patients who are in the system whom they can see. There are others whom they have reviewed, suggested, or recommended be referred back to general practitioners for further assessment, and taken steps to see they are referred back. Under the circumstances, I do not think that is an unreasonable step for them to take.
Dianne YatesWhat reports, if any, has the Minister received on increases in elective procedures under the Labour-led Government?
I have seen two reports. One, based on fact—something that clearly the National Party does not know much about—shows that the number of people who received elective surgery has gone up by 8 percent, or 12.6 percent on a case-weighted basis, since the change of Government. The other report I have seen is from the National Party and shows the numbers are going down not up, but it does that by excluding all medical activity, all acute surgical activity, all case weighting, and all out-patient surgical activity, and by forgetting the year in which Labour was actually elected.
Tariana TuriaGiven the Minister’s response to yesterday’s question, when he appeared to attribute responsibility for systemic bias to myself as one of two Associate Ministers to the Hon Annette King, now that he is the Minister would he be prepared to take responsibility for the systemic bias that currently exists in the health system that denies Māori people access to it; if not, why not?
All I can say to that question and answer is that if the member has evidence of that systemic bias and supplies it to me, I will get comment back to her.
Can the Minister advise us how many people have been culled from waiting lists at other district health boards, when the publicly announced figures from the various district health boards I am about to list already total over 10,000: 1,800 from the Hawke’s Bay District Health Board, 2,000 from the Canterbury District Health Board, 3,000 from the Waikato District Health Board, 1,800 from the Counties Manukau District Health Board, 1,100 dumped from the MidCentral District Health Board, and 400 from the Bay of Plenty District Health Board? That figure is already over 10,000; how many people have been culled from the other 12 district health boards?
In the time available to provide an answer to this oral question, I asked officials to contact all the district health boards to get that information. Three, I understand, did not reply, but when I asked officials they said that the range is regularly somewhere between 10,000 and 14,000, and that about 10,000 for the 18 out of 21 boards that replied is an accurate figure.
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. The Minister has a list of the district health boards with their numbers with him.
Will any of the 24,000 people who have currently waited more than 6 months to see a specialist be culled from the waiting list in the next year?
Although the member is quoting the 24,085 people who have been waiting for a first specialist assessment for longer than 6 months, it is worth noting, for the benefit of the House and the people of New Zealand, that last year over 400,000 people received a first specialist assessment. The number of people waiting for a specialist assessment for longer than 6 months, which is what the member seems to be worried about, has actually fallen by 42 percent under this Government.
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. A Minister cannot simply stand up and quote another set of numbers that are completely unrelated to the question. The question was: how many of the people who are currently waiting more than 6 months to see a specialist—many of those people are very sick—can look forward to being culled from the waiting list in the next 12 months? Will any of them be culled in the next 12 months?
In the first instance, the figures I am quoting to the member are the figures I have received under advice that the number of people waiting for a first specialist assessment for longer than 6 months, which is the area we have to show concern about, has actually fallen by 42 percent under this Government. In so far as the question relates to what may happen to others, that is dependent on the professional clinical view of those who are responsible for looking at the interim reports they get from general practitioners and on the decisions they make to refer those patients back to their general practitioner for further assessment.
Dr Jonathan Coleman Link to this
Who does the Minister seriously expect reasonable people to believe on matters of elective surgery: himself—the four out of 10 Minister who says that the National Party is crisis-mongering and who has said: “It’s not fair, it’s not true, and it’s time it stopped.”—or the senior surgeon in New Zealand, the chairman of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, who says that talk of the crisis is not manufactured and, in fact—as we have heard—the numbers are getting worse? Who does he really think people will believe?
I believe these two facts, because I know them to be absolutely correct: more than 400,000 New Zealanders have been seen by a specialist this year, and the 10,000 to 14,000 people who have been referred back to a general practitioner represent about 2.5 percent of those who have actually been seen by a specialist.
Will any of the people currently waiting for a first specialist assessment be culled from that waiting list in the next year?
I cannot answer that definitively, because that is in the judgment of those who are looking at the system. I do know that those who are referred back for further assessment are deemed by clinical assessment not to require urgent attention, and that it is deemed there is merit in having a further assessment at a general practitioner level. And any Opposition members who want to cast aspersions on the inadequacy of the general practitioner system in this country should actually look carefully at the important service to the country that the primary health care general practitioner clinicians offer in their own areas.
I seek leave to table an interview where the Minister of Health said general practitioners who refer patients to waiting lists in Hawke’s Bay are “unethical”.
Madam SPEAKER
Gerry BrownleeI raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I did not want to interrupt my colleague during that point of order, but during that particular exchange there was a very, very audible interjection from a section of the House that should well be in your eyesight. We do note that a number of our members have been asked to leave the Chamber at various times for similar interjections, but today there was no intervention from you and the particular offender was not required to leave. I just ask you to please look for consistency in the way you deal with the House.