Health Minister says Govt's promises are coming true

An artist’s impression of plans for a new Dunedin Hospital. Image: Supplied
An artist’s impression of plans for a new Dunedin Hospital. Image: Supplied
Health Minister David Clark outlines the Government’s commitment to a strong public health service.
 

Last week, the Coalition Government passed one year in office. The milestone was marked by media with reports analysing our record in office.

What have we delivered? Has our rhetoric been matched by the reality? It was the media doing its job of holding politicians to account.

As Minister of Health I'm happy to be judged on my record. So far it is a record that includes better funding for district health boards (an extra $2.2billion over four years) and the largest injection of capital spending in health for more than a decade ($750million this year).

Neither of those figures featured in last Friday's Otago Daily Times' editorial ''Hospitals too valuable to politicise''.

Fair enough you might say - it's not the Otago Daily Times' job to promote the Government's achievements.

It is, however, the ODT's job to put the figures it uses in context. The suggestion the previous National-led government was somehow more generous to health than the Helen Clark government does not bear scrutiny. Over the course of the fifth Labour government, investment in health grew from 5.3% of GDP to 6.13%. Under the National-led Government that followed, health spending fell as a percentage of GDP to 5.74% in its final year.

To put that simply - the Labour-led government of 1999-2008 invested in health at a far faster rate than the Key/English government. From 2008-17, health spending reduced as a percentage of GDP. That's pretty unusual in a country such as ours.

Now, that might sound like political point-scoring but these numbers actually matter. They speak to the different priorities of the parties that led those governments. And that matters because in a democracy voters make their decisions on which party to support based on their priorities and their record in Government.

In Opposition we made rebuilding our health services one of our key pledges to voters. I'd argue that differences over health policy, funding and mental health were some of the biggest issues of the election.

This Government is committed to a strong public health service. In Dunedin the most obvious manifestation of that is the new hospital project. After years of being left on the back burner we are now making real progress on delivering for the people of the South.

We promised we'd find a central city site for the hospital - and we did. We promised there would be fully public ownership of hospital facilities (rather than a public private partnership, which has pushed up costs wherever it has been tried). And we promised construction would start in this term of Parliament - and it will.

Of course, our health service is far more than bricks and mortar and lines in budgets. First and foremost it is about people - the staff that deliver quality care every day and the patients they help. All New Zealanders rely on our health service and have the right to expect it to be there when they need it.

In that context the editorial is absolutely correct when it talks about the need for a deep conversation about what sort of health service we want in New Zealand.

That's why earlier this year I announced a wide-ranging review of the health and disability sector. It is asking the big questions - how do we ensure equity of outcomes for all, how do we tackle the rising tide of chronic diseases like cancer and diabetes, how can we make the most of primary care to take pressure off our hospitals?

These are not simple questions. It will take more than 18 months for the review to be completed, at a cost of about $9.5million. But when it reports back we will have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reshape and renew our public health service for the 21stcentury.

Health matters to us all and I have no doubt there will be a vigorous public debate about any proposed changes. That is as it should be, and I welcome it. I also have no doubt the Opposition will hold our feet to the fire for the decisions we take. That is their right and their role.

You could call that political point-scoring. I prefer to call it democratic accountability.

Add a Comment