Ms ROSOL (Bass) – Deputy Speaker, I rise this evening to speak about an outrageous and dangerous decision made by this government to move to cut staffing and mental health services.
If you talk to any Tasmanian, they will be able to tell you awful stories about how the problems in the health system have affected them, their loved ones or people they know. It is a crisis that has deepened under the Liberals. Year on year we have heard this government saying they are investing enough in health, but with outcomes in the system going backwards year on year too, it is self-evident that investment has been inadequate.
In light of the major crisis in our health system and the deterioration that continues to occur, we should be seeing more investment in these services. Instead, what we have seen revealed by the Health and Community Services Union today, is that the Liberals are pushing cuts to the health budget and staffing numbers.
HACSU today released an internal memo from the Department of Health’s acting deputy secretary. The memo is titled ‘Budget Position and Vacancy Control Committee’ and advises the community, mental health and wellbeing executive of an alarming decision. From the memo:
“The department’s budget position has deteriorated significantly over this financial year and is forecast to continue to worsen in 2024‑25 unless strategies are put in place. In addition, the department is expected to make savings from next financial year.”
‘Savings’. Cuts, in other words. The memo goes on to say:
“The secretary has advised that a Vacancy Control Committee will be in place as a strategy to assist with budget repair.”
It goes on to describe how this committee will, wherever possible, seek to avoid filling vacancies. For patient‑facing roles, it asks a range of guiding questions:
“Can the vacancy be covered by a staff member in a non patient‑facing role which would not need to be backfilled? Is a safe service reduction possible? If leaving the role vacant would increase risk, is there a way of managing that risk without backfilling the role? Is there a need to cover the entire period of the vacancy? Does the role need 100 per cent coverage, or can it be managed with reduced coverage – a full‑time role covered as part‑time.
Does the entirety of every shift need coverage or can the area manage if reduced hours per shift were available? Can the vacancy be covered by any other means – casual, VMO, EN for RN, part‑time staff increasing hours temporarily, overtime, reconfiguring rosters, et cetera. What other factors might impact the need for the backfilling of the role? Example: if we are going to have a theatre out of action for a month, we may not need to backfill all theatre staff roles during the period.”
If it was not such a serious issue, this would be laughable. In a system that is already massively understaffed and lacking in services, it is simply not possible to deliver a safe service reduction. It is not possible to move staff around without negative effects. It is not okay to expect staff to do more overtime or to change their conditions. It is not possible to effectively mitigate the increased risks of reduced staffing with other measures.
I might ask, why would we have an operating theatre out of action for a month? Could it possibly be due to a lack of staffing? The point is that whenever there are cuts to essential public services, there are real consequences for real people. That is particularly true for an area like mental health, where so many vulnerable people are potentially affected. It is no exaggeration to say lives will be put at risk due to these cuts to mental health services. It is a shameful situation.
A government and a minister that wants to see our health system improve would not be taking decisions like this one. I call on the minister to immediately reverse this appalling decision and to rule out any other similar measures being taken for other parts of the health department.
