﻿Mr SPEAKER: The House comes to Questions for Oral Answer.
Question No 1, Hon Annette King.
Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour)
to the Minister of Health: Does he agree with the statement
from the Chair of the PHO Alliance who said of Budget 2016,
“Primary care cannot deliver essential new models of care
"within existing and reducing financial resources”; if not, why not?
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Health):
No, but I thought I had better go and read the full quote in context.
It is from the Primary Health Alliance, in which it also welcomes
the bowel screening investment and the increased Pharmac funding.
It observes that we have a great primary-care system
but it also wants more detail on the money.
The increase in total primary-care funding
in Budget 2016 is estimated to be around $30 million.
This means funding is up $233 million under National,
a 35% increase.
Hon Annette King: Is the $6 million increase
in the primary-care strategy in Budget 2016 from $180 million
to $186 million adequate in light of the chair
of General Practice NZ Dr Jeff Lowe’s comments
that primary care was hoping to hear of $20 million
to $26 million more a year to address years of funding
that has not kept up with inflation?
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Indeed, the funding increase
is $30 million, which is greater than $26 million.
Hon Annette King: Is NZ Rural General Practice Network
chief executive officer Dalton Kelly wrong when he said
that apart from an increase in ambulance funding
there is little else for rural health in Budget 2016?
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Well, I know Dalton Kelly well
and he thinks that this is a very good Budget.
He would be very pleased, as are many, many NZers,
with the $2.2 billion going into health and the $1.6 billion
going into DHBs—and many of those dollars, of course,
will be spent in the rural sector. So, I do not know;
I wonder if you are misrepresenting him.
Hon Annette King: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.
You cannot have a Minister say that I represent him,
and then, when I want to table the evidence from a paywall document—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! If the member is now seeking to table a document,
that is a different matter, but I just cannot pick
what the point of order is that the member is trying to ask.
Hon Annette King: I seek leave to table the page from NZ Doctor,
which is a paywall document—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! Just keep the explanation simple and quick.
Hon Annette King: It is the NZ Doctor magazine, dated 8 June,
and I correctly quoted Mr Dalton Kelly.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! On the basis that this information may not be
readily available to members, I will put the leave.
Leave is sought to table an article from NZ Doctor magazine,
of June this year. Is there any objection?
There is no objection. It can be tabled.
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: I seek leave to table an article,
dated 15 June, entitled “King clutching at straws”.
Mr SPEAKER: No, I do not need that at the moment.
I need to know the source of the article.
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: It is probably publicly available to be honest with you.
Mr SPEAKER: It sounds like it is a newspaper article.
I will not be putting the leave.
Hon Annette King: I seek leave to table a document from the NZ Doctor—
I am sorry; I do not have the date— where Dr Coleman is referred to as “Dr No”.
Mr SPEAKER: No, I think that is not going to help to inform members at all.
[MEMBERS INTERJECT]
Hon Annette King: When was the report of Primary Care Working Group
on General Practice Sustainability, which recommended changes
to the Very Low Cost Access Scheme, delivered to him for consideration?
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Oh, a wee while ago.
Hon Annette King: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.
Is that an adequate answer, Mr Speaker?
Mr SPEAKER: I think on this case it is, when you look
at where the primary question went. It is not a helpful answer but the member—
Hon Annette King: No, it is a smart-arse answer.
Mr SPEAKER: Well, the member may conclude it is a smart answer,
but it is one that has addressed the question.
[MEMBERS INTERJECT]
Hon Annette King: Does the chair of the NZ Medical Association’s
General Practitioner Council, Kate Baddock, reflect his position
when she said of his decision to not fund changes
to the Very Low Cost Access Scheme that: “There is no new money.
"We are stuck with the status quo and with the inequities
"that represents unless—”
Mr SPEAKER: Order! Bring the question to a conclusion.
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Well, I am not going to quote
on whether or not Dr Baddock said that, but what I can say
is the Very Low Cost Access Scheme is only 6% of total
primary-care money. As I can tell you, the money for primary care
has gone up $233 million under this Government.
That is 35%, and when you consider that the population
has grown by 12%, that is well ahead of population growth,
so there is plenty of money there— and plenty of good service as well.
Hon Annette King: Because there is no new funding to address
the inequities in the Very Low Cost Access Scheme,
what will happen to the 600,000 high-need, low-income patients
without affordable doctors visits, which he last week said:
“Is not something the general population is excited about.”?
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Once again, the quote is out of context. But, look,
there is plenty of money. The member knows there is $2.2 billion
over the next 4 years for primary care. If you want to talk about
supporting access to primary care, this Government has delivered
to under-13s free GP visits and free prescriptions,
benefiting three-quarters of a million children and families—
something that the member never bothered to do
when she had the chance, which was a shame.
Hon Annette King: Has he given up on addressing
the most pressing need in primary health care,
which is the Very Low Cost Access Scheme,
when he said to the NZ Doctor last week: “It could form part
"of a future Budget, possibly under a new Minister of Health.”?—
I am happy to do the job.
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Actually, that is a complete misquote.
Sorry, but it is.
Mr SPEAKER: Question No 2.
Subtitles by the Amara.org community