10. Hon TONY RYALL (National—Bay of Plenty) Link to this
to the Minister of Health
How many fulltime-equivalent staff were employed by the Ministry of Health in 2000, and how many are employed now?
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Minister of Health) Link to this
I am advised that as of 30 June 2001 there were 1,007 fulltime-equivalent staff employed by the Ministry of Health. As at 30 June 2008 there were 1,430 fulltime-equivalent staff. Directly comparable information on staff numbers prior to 2001 is not available as it was prior to the Health Funding Authority and Health Benefits Ltd joining the Ministry of Health. However, I have signalled to the director-general that future output gains should be driven by reprioritisation rather than through significant further fulltime-equivalent staff growth.
Why is it that under Labour the growth in bureaucrats at the Ministry of Health and district health boards is higher than the growth of front-line doctors and nurses in New Zealand public hospitals, and should not the priority be in getting more care for New Zealanders instead of more money into the bureaucracy?
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE Link to this
The member opposite often misrepresents the statistics. Let me reclarify for the member that the growth in front-line medical staff—doctors and nurses—has been higher than the growth in support staff across the system since Labour took office.
Lesley SoperCan he confirm that the overall proportion of health spending that goes to the Ministry of Health has actually declined under this Labour-led Government, and does he agree with suggestions that public servants employed by the ministry could be sacked in order to pay for tax cuts?
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE Link to this
In answer to the first part of the question, absolutely yes. I can confirm that the overall proportion of health spending that goes to the ministry has remained consistently below 2 percent during Labour’s time in office, and is lower today than it was when it took office in 2000. We can only assume that the National Party wants to discredit the Ministry of Health so that National can justify savage cuts to employee numbers in order to pay for its massive tax cuts. I also note that health appeared nowhere in John Key’s list of top 10 priorities, and, in fact, the only mention of it at the National Party conference that I saw appeared to be National’s commitment to privatise more of it.
Is the Minister’s admission in the House today that he has asked the Director-General of Health to prioritise future needs of the ministry within current staffing levels an admission that under the failed leadership of Helen Clark and Annette King, the Ministry of Health bureaucracy has grown like Topsy, sucking financial resources that should have been going into the front line to deal with the endless waiting that New Zealand patients suffer under?
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE Link to this
Between 2001 and 2006 staffing numbers grew hardly at all. I am absolutely unashamed to say that this Government remains committed to value for money for the New Zealand public, just as it does to increasing the level of services provided free or at low cost to New Zealanders through our fine public health system, and that will continue to be a priority for this Government, unlike the Opposition that could not get health anywhere in its top 10 list of things to do, even after Bill English’s apology.
With the Government’s own data showing that the Ministry of Health has grown by 182 percent in the time of the Labour Government, is his admission today that he has raised this issue with the Director-General of Health not an indication that Labour has put too much priority on growing the bureaucracy at the expense of front-line services for New Zealanders?
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE Link to this
This member is just slippery with figures. The only way he could possibly construct 182 percent out of the facts in the health system is if he added up a whole lot of entities that were formerly outsourced from the ministry, counted that as the baseline, and, after they were absorbed, compared the total. The New Zealand public deserves a whole lot better disclosure from the National Party than that member’s slippery figures, secret phone books of policy, and the truth slipping out in inadvertent conversations.
Katrina ShanksDid any of the Minister’s many bureaucrats tell him how bad it is for mums on the West Coast, when recently a West Coast woman who was having contractions 5 to 10 minutes apart and was 34 weeks pregnant was asked to drive herself over Arthur’s Pass, in winter, with a $40 McDonald’s voucher, to Christchurch Hospital because the West Coast District Health Board is once again experiencing staff shortages and cannot provide specialised maternity services?
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE Link to this
It is a really good idea for members, if they want to talk about maternity services, to put it down in the primary question. However, I will address that question. Labour’s primary concern is for the health and safety of mothers and their babies. Therefore, it is important if a particular pregnancy is high risk, that delivery take place in a hospital with a full range of back-up services. Right at the moment it is deemed that the safest place for that to be is Canterbury.
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE Link to this
It is not the mother’s fault, and no one other than that member has suggested that. It is also true that this Government is working with district health boards to form strong regional clinical networks to ensure that we have a full range of increasingly specialised services available all the time. That is the right and responsible thing to do. What this Government will not do is to try to cover up issues by prejudicing patients’ safety.
Is the Minister saying that even though he has over 1,400 staff in the Ministry of Health, not one of them drew to his attention the story in the Christchurch Press today that a West Coast woman who was having contractions and who was 34 weeks pregnant had to drive herself across Arthur’s Pass to Christchurch Hospital and was discharged with a $40 McDonald’s voucher, having been told that that would feed her and her husband for 3 days, and was then sent back to the West Coast and told that a rental car would be the best option—he has 1,400 bureaucrats and not one of them drew to his attention what was a leading story in the Christchurch Press today; is that the reason why he has spoken to the Director-General of Health about reprioritising those 1,400 people?
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE Link to this
The questions get more and more desperate. Of course I heard about the woman, which is why I was happy to answer the question. The point is that it bore no resemblance to the primary question. The health system in New Zealand is appropriately extensive. It involves over 60,000—60,000—front-line and support health workers nationwide, it delivers nearly 20 percent of the Government’s budget, and it provides tens of thousands of procedures every week to New Zealanders who need them. The difference for the public to understand this year is that under Labour it is the size of the need that counts, not the size of the wallet.