By Bruce Marlowe
SYDNEY — A council-conducted referendum has recorded a 60% vote against NSW government plans to privatise Port Macquarie's public hospital. About 85% of local residents participated in the September 19 vote.
The people of this reputedly conservative rural and resort city, in a National Party electorate, clearly didn't believe glowing government promises about a planned new state-of-the-art private hospital.
The No campaign was conducted by the Port Macquarie Hospital Action Group, which pointed out that the government could easily afford $50 million for a new public hospital out of $6 billion capital works spending announced by Premier John Fahey in the recent state budget.
Moreover, the group pointed to the NSW government's refusal to take up $1.2 billion of borrowing approved by the Commonwealth Loan Council. It is widely accepted that the Port Macquarie proposal is a politically motivated attempt to establish a bridgehead for more widespread privatisation of public health services.
The Evatt Foundation's Dr Peter Botsman points out that Australia's public health system provides services far more efficiently and cheaply than the largely private US system. Australia spends around $US1127 per person on health services, while the US spends around $2566 to provide a system that delivers negligible service to around 100 million of the poorest citizens.
Unfortunately, Manly independent Dr Peter Macdonald, who initially opposed the scheme, changed sides after discussions with health minister Ron Phillips, giving the government the numbers to get its plan through parliament.
The government's response to the council-run referendum was summed up by a health department official: "Of course, we're not taking any notice of it. The contract will be signed in four or five weeks."
Premier Fahey is gambling that by the time the next election comes around, Port Macquarie will have a gleaming new hospital and the long-term consequences of a local medical monopoly won't have impacted very strongly. However, the arrogance of the government could turn the safe conservative seat into a plum for a local independent.