Latest News

• Add My News • Search Old News

Gippsland › Latest news › Craig Ingram

Ingram raises CGHS concerns in Parliament

The Independent Member for Gippsland East, Craig Ingram, has called on the Minister for Health, Bronwyn Pike, to answer a number of questions regarding the financial performance of Central Gippsland Health Service (CGHS).

By Craig Ingram - 5th April 2006 - Back to News

The Minister dismissed the CGHS Board in 2004 amidst allegations of financial mismanagement.

"It appears from the annual reports that the service is in a less financial position and has performed less equivalent surgical procedures, whilst being provided with larger financial support from the State Government," Mr Ingram said.

"Has the actual cash flow from operating activities, which includes both capital grants and capital costs, deteriorated by $332,000 in 2004–05.

"Was the major reason for the removal of the former CGHS Board related to financial management, or (was it) that it opposed the Department of Human Services Regional Office plans to downgrade the specialist services at CGHS," Mr Ingram questioned.

"Given that the Minister has previously guaranteed that CGHS will not be downgraded, I also asked the Minister if she supports a proposal by the current administrator of CGHS to examine whether CGHS remains a referral hospital for high-risk obstetrics and neonatology.

Mr Ingram said the leader of the National Party, Peter Ryan, must justify his position on his previous comments on CGHS’s financial position in light of the questions put forward.

Questions

CENTRAL GIPPSLAND HEALTH SERVICE (CGHS) — FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE — Mr Ingram to ask the Minister for Health with reference to the financial performance of CGHS —

(1) Was the profit/loss net result for the year 2004–05, as concluded by the Auditor-General, a deficit of $1.742 million; if so, does this include the costs of the administration of CGHS.

(2) Was the profit/loss net result for the year 2003–04, as concluded by the Auditor-General, a deficit of $389,000.

(3) What were the costs of the administrator of CGHS in 2004–05.

(4) Was CGHS given an equity injection of $2 million in 2004–05.

(5) Has the actual cash flow from operating activities, which includes both capital grants and capital costs, deteriorated by $332,000 in 2004–05.

(6) Is CGHS still required to be on ‘close watch’ by the Auditor-General and report on a monthly basis to the Department of Human Services.

CENTRAL GIPPSLAND HEALTH SEVICE (CGHS) — OVERDRAFT LIMIT — Mr Ingram to ask the Minister for Health with reference to the CGHS overdraft limit of $300,000 —

(1) Given the CGHS overdraft limit, why do the financial accounts state that the overdraft reached $1.804 million in 2003–04.

(2) Was the overdraft completely extinguished in 2004–05; if so, how and why.

CENTRAL GIPPSLAND HEALTH SERVICE (CGHS) — PROPERTY PLANT AND EQUIPMENT — Mr Ingram to ask the Minister for Health —

(1) Did the costs of property plant and equipment in 2003–04 reach a total of $6.854 million; if so, how much of that figure included the cost of constructing the new aged care facility, Wilson Lodge.

(2) Was a capital grant of approximately $4 million given to CGHS in 2003–04 to finance the construction of Wilson Lodge.

(3) Did the costs of property plant and equipment in 2004–05 reach only $1.459 million and was the differential between the corresponding cost in 2003–04 the major reason why the working capital position has improved.

CENTRAL GIPPSLAND HEALTH SERVICE (CGHS) — WEIGHTED INLIER EQUIVALENT SEPARATIONS (WEIS) — Mr Ingram to ask the Minister for Health — did CGHS perform fewer WEIS in 2004–05 compared to 2003–04; if so, despite performing fewer WEIS in 2004–05, was CGHS paid a total of $1.939 million more in Government contributions for that work in 2003–04.

CENTRAL GIPPSLAND HEALTH SERVICE (CGHS) — FORMER BOARD AND ADMINISTRATOR — Mr Ingram to ask the Minister for Health with reference to the former CGHS Board that was sacked in November 2004 —

(1) Did the Walter Turnbull report conclude that there was no evidence of financial mismanagement by the former CGHS Board.

(2) Has the financial performance of the administrator resulted in at least a four-fold worse net result for the year than that returned by the former CGHS Board.

(3) Is the removal of the administrator six months prior to the completion of the expected term related to the financial performance in 2004–05.

(4) Were any of the initiatives cited by the Regional Director of Department of Human Services in a presentation to Wellington Shire Council in August 2005 initiatives commenced by the administrator or were they all initiatives commenced by the former CGHS Board.

(5) Does the Department of Human Services hold any information that further exonerates the former CGHS Board from unproven allegations which it had not released.

(6) Was the major reason for the removal of the former CGHS Board related to financial management or that it opposed the Department of Human Services Regional Office plans to downgrade the specialist services at CGHS.

(7) Does the Minister for Health support a proposal by the current administrator of CGHS to examine whether CGHS remains a referral hospital for high-risk obstetrics and neonatology given the Minister has guaranteed the CGHS will not be downgraded.


Source: http://gippsland.com/

Published by: news@gippsland.com



Edit this news article




Related Articles

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Baw Baw Bass Coast Cardinia East Gippsland Latrobe City South Gippsland Wellington
© 2001-2025 gippsland.com Print this page | Subscribe to Newsletter | Feedback / Inquiries | Login
Care has been taken in compiling the component parts of this website. However, Gippsland.com does not warrant or represent that the website is free from errors or omissions, that the qualifications claimed by an advertiser are valid or that the published details of any advertiser are as stated on the website. Please review the full statement of our Terms and Conditions of Service and disclaimer.