Extract from Hansard Legislative Council 26 July 2001
Sandra Kanck Deputy Leader Australian Democrats Member of the Legislative Council		Parliament Index 2001 Autumn Sitting Index Browse by Subject   Search all Democrats material   About the SA Parliament Hansard on line

The Hon. SANDRA KANCK: I seek leave to make an explanation before asking the Minister for Transport, representing the Minister for Human Services, questions regarding a booklet published by the Medical Board of South Australia entitled Requirements and Procedures for Dealing with Matters of Complaints Concerning Registered Medical Practitioners 1999 .

Leave granted.

The Hon. SANDRA KANCK: According to the Medical Board, the booklet was published in the hope that the information contained will foster a greater understanding of the board's role in dealing with matters of complaint. The booklet outlines current perceptions (that is its word) of the Medical Board, its powers and obligations. It describes the nature of medicine in South Australia and the types of complaints and how they are dealt with. It is considered a useful tool for both doctors and the public to comprehend the role of the board and how complaints are handled.

I have been informed that this book was a collaborative effort between the Medical Board and the Ombudsman's office. I have two booklets, however, both dated in the year 1999. They appear to be the same but one book has an editorial change. On page 16 of one booklet, there is a paragraph under the section dealing with complaints and it states:

In addition, steps have recently been taken to ensure that factual material provided by a practitioner in response to a complaint will be checked and verified with the complainant and that the complainant has an opportunity to comment thereon as part of the investigative process.

The other book, which appears to be identical, does not have that paragraph and I understand that of the two the most recent edition is the one that does not have the paragraph.

As proof of the need for such information, I have been told by a constituent that they had tried to access material provided by their practitioner in order to verify it as part of the investigative process into the complaint they had launched with the board but their request was denied. The investigation of their complaint was stopped due to insufficient evidence. Despite this, the constituent used FOI legislation to obtain the information and, as a result, the information was considered evidence enough for the investigation to be reopened. My questions to the minister are:

1. On whose authority or direction was the paragraph removed from the booklet?

2. Why was the paragraph removed?

3. Was the Ombudsman's office consulted about this change and, if not, why not?

4. Does the removal of this paragraph affect the transparency and accountability of the board's investigation process?

5. Does the removal of the paragraph mean that there is no obligation to `ensure that factual material provided by a practitioner in response to a complaint will be checked and verified with the complainant'?

6. If an obligation still exists, will the booklet be reprinted to include that information?

The Hon. DIANA LAIDLAW (Minister for Transport and Urban Planning): I will refer the questions to the minister and bring back a reply.

[National] [Search] [Browse] [People] [Party] [Parliament] [Election]
[News & Media] [Support Us] [Contact Us] [Main Page]

As of 1/1/2001 this site is a Disability Access Approved Site