State Election 2010

[Will]

As someone in the health field, what exactly does this mean?:

11) Integrating traditional Aboriginal knowledge into modern medicine, food and environmental management

With respect to health, traditional Aboriginal medicine is a wholistic approach, utilising plants and other food in combinations and ways unknown to us and applying on the basis of the pyschological state of the patient at that particular time.

Food is obviously in reference to products that we are only superficially aware of and also treating all food as a type of medicine or enhancement of the individual.

In environmental management, fire is a good example. Traditional Aborigines use fire according to microclimatic conditions, very specific dryness/wetness of individual plants in the area, micro topography, etc.

I still don't understand the point of this policy. Medicine is a science. The treatments prescribed by a doctor or other health professional have been independently tested and found on the basis of rigorous scientific testing to be beneficial to the patient.

Traditional Aboriginal knowledge like most traditional and alternative therapies have been found not to work, and the only reason people may notice any benefit is due to the placebo effect.

As someone in the health field, I think that such a policy may make people fell all 'warm and fuzzy' but I fear that they may place people's health at risk, if medical practioners are forced to waste time prescribing and using traditional therapies.

[Nort]

There is also the thinking that says it is not so much a case of Aboriginals happening upon the perfect fire strategy for the Australian landscape, but rather that the Australian landscape has shaped itself based on tens of thousands of years of Aboriginal fires.

Ultimately it makes no different to their effectiveness, but it's interesting to think about.

[Will]

Whilst there is a high degree of merit of retaining the RAH at its current site, the Liberals proposed renovation is not good enough. It is a mediocre patch-up job.

The experts seem to agree:

From the Advertiser:

AMA tells Liberals to scrap Royal Adelaide Hospital policy

Tory Shepherd From: AdelaideNow March 15, 2010 12:01AM

LIBERAL Party plans to rebuild the Royal Adelaide Hospital for $700 million should be scrapped, the Australian Medical Association says.
The AMA wants the Liberals to revert to one of their previous plans, which comprised a $1.4 billion overhaul, because they say the current policy will not get the hospital up to scratch.

The RAH has shaped up to be one of the most important issues of the election, with the two major parties and some minor parties fighting over whether to rebuild or start anew, and over estimated costs.

The AMA says it does not back either party's proposals because neither will have enough beds, but strongly criticised the Liberals' plans.

State president Dr Andrew Lavender says the existing operating theatres, intensive care units, and accident and emergency facilities are all outdated and he criticised those who claim the RAH's facilities are world class.

Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.
RAH rebuild or demolitionDo you support the Liberals' plan to rebuild the RAH, or the Labor plan to build a new hospital? The Liberal rebuild Labor's demolition job I don't care - just give me better facilities Vote now .Related CoverageSupport: Nurses to rally for new RAH
Riverland: Extra emergency treatment promised
QEH to get $125m upgrade under Labor Adelaide Now, 4 hours ago
$44m spend on Modbury Hospital Adelaide Now, 5 days ago
Rann promises voters best deals The Australian, 19 Feb 2010
Doctors want new theatre Adelaide Now, 11 Feb 2010
Battle lines drawn over RAH Adelaide Now, 18 Nov 2009
.End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.
The Liberal Party originally had three different options, and settled on the least expensive one with a promise to retain the "state-of-the-art" ICU, ED and operating theatres, and a pledge that the savings would flow to other health services.

"We were very happy with the original proposal," Dr Lavender said.

"The $1.4 billion proposal was a comparable proposal to the planned new hospital."

Dr Lavender said people who want to keep the existing site are "doing a disservice to the people of SA" by saying that existing facilities are worth retaining when, he says, they are not adequate.

He said trauma services really needed to be improved and that for financial reasons the RAH's operating theatres were not even best standard when they were first built.

The State Government, which has been scathing about what it calls the Liberals' "patch up job", says essential cancer services are missing from the Liberal plan. Health Minister John Hill says a specialist bunker that houses linear accelerators - used in radiation treatment - would be bulldozed.

"When we started planning for a new home for the RAH, we were advised that the location of the bunker for the linear accelerators, and the cancer services that go along with them, is just as important as the location of the Emergency Department," he said.

"The Liberals were warned about this but have either forgotten to include cancer services in their plan or are really proposing to risk patient safety by putting the linear accelerators in an accommodation tower."

Opposition Leader Isobel Redmond's spokesman said their designs incorporated everything necessary, and that there would be room for expansion and new buildings "down the track".

"This has all been accounted for in the design of the hospital," he said.

"All the services have been built into the design and we are comfortable with our costings and our plans to rebuild on site."

&

Nurses to rally for new RAH

Lauren Novak, political reporter From: AdelaideNow March 15, 2010 10:07AM

NURSES are preparing to demonstrate their support for a new hospital this morning with a rally at the Royal Adelaide Hospital.
Nurses and midwives say the care of South Australians "can only be met with the construction of a new'' hospital.

Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation SA branch secretary Elizabeth Dabars said a new facility would increase bed capacity, improve patient accommodation and provide more space for emergency care, operating theatres and other specialist services.

Ms Dabars said it was ``not possible to deliver'' such services and maintain safety and efficiency while rebuilding on the current site.

The State Government wants to build a new $1.7 billion hospital on the city railyards site while the Opposition wants to rebuild the hospital on North Tce for $700 million.


"RAH nurses are telling us that while they hold enormous affection for the history and reputation of the hospital, the existing facilities are a nightmare for patient care and the situation will only get worse with a major rebuild on the same site,'' Ms Dabars said.

The rally will be held at 10.30am at the main entrance to the RAH.

[Splashmo]

And its the current Liberal proposal that makes me feel like Labor's plan to build a new hospital, even on a valuable site, is the better option. Although even that plan is going to give us a hospital that really doesn't have enough beds.

[rhino]

More than anyone else, when the nurses say we need a new hospital, I think it's worth taking notice.

[stumpjumper]

rhino it's also worth noting the traditional closeness of the left-leaning Nurses Federation to the Rann government. For example, Gail Gago is a former head of the ANF. It may have been a case of calling all troops to the ramparts.

[stumpjumper]

Mere semantics, perhaps, but did anyone else notice that during Rann's TV election broadcast he said several times that he was working hard for South Australians and that 'they' should consider what he had done for 'them'. It seemed an odd choice of pronoun - surely 'we' would be better. I was surprised at the term in a speech of such importance.

[rhino]

rhino it's also worth noting the traditional closeness of the left-leaning Nurses Federation to the Rann government. For example, Gail Gago is a former head of the ANF. It may have been a case of calling all troops to the ramparts.

Is there anywhere you don't see a conspiracy?

[Will]

rhino it's also worth noting the traditional closeness of the left-leaning Nurses Federation to the Rann government. For example, Gail Gago is a former head of the ANF. It may have been a case of calling all troops to the ramparts.

You surely cannot say the same for the AMA....

[iTouch]

My senses a telling me "Hung Parliament... Hung Parliament" could I sense right or should I be mindful of my thoughts?

[Straze]

This article is from AdelaideNow: Isobel can win, says John Howard

liberalh.jpg

FORMER Prime Minister John Howard says Isobel Redmond can win Saturday's election.

Mr Howard spoke exclusively to AdelaideNow this morning at Adelaide Airport ahead of a Liberal fundraising lunch.

He arrived alone and carrying only a small briefcase and said he was impressed with Ms Redmond's leadership and campaign style.

"Isobel Redmond has made a huge impact, she's new, she's fresh, she's bright, she's authentic, people like that," he said.

"They're really much better than might have been expected six months ago."

While Mr Howard conceded it would be a "tough" task to win "because a big swing is needed" he said Ms Redmond had "certainly won the momentum of the campaign."

"Of course she can win but it's an enormous mountain to climb," he said.

Mr Howard toed the state party line, saying he felt South Australians "want change".

"This Government's been in power for a long time," he said.

"I think they (voters) are tired of the spin."

Mr Howard said he had not heard Ms Redmond's comments yesterday, but was not offended at not being invited on the campaign trail.

Ms Redmond told AdelaideNow he had not been asked to join her campaign, which was focused on the future and not the past.

"Previous people are probably better staying out of these things," she said.

Mr Howard is in Adelaide for a "boardroom-style" lunch with Liberal Party faithful before leaving town mid-afternoon.

Neither Mr Howard's staff or state Opposition Leader Isobel Redmond's office would reveal the ticket price or location for the event when contacted last night.

Ms Redmond, who's live interview on AdelaideNow's starts at noon today, denied she was avoiding being seen with Mr Howard because of his disastrous performance at the 2007 federal election.

Mr Howard lost government in a landslide and became only the second sitting Prime Minister to lose this own seat.

"It's not that I don't want him, it's just that my timetable and his are unlikely to coincide," she said.

"I'm flat out this week doing things that are already organised.

"I honestly don't think that that's going to happen."

Ms Redmond enlisted current federal Liberal leader and Howard loyalist Tony Abbott for her campaign launch at Norwood Town Hall a fortnight ago.

Liberal strategists say Mr Abbott is unlikely to visit Adelaide before Saturday's poll due to the Federal Parliament sitting schedule.

Rumours of a possible Adelaide visit by Mr Howard surfaced late last week, sparking speculation about whether he would be drawn into publicly supporting Ms Redmond.

Some party insiders have suggested the state Liberals intended to distance themselves from Mr Howard because he became "electoral poison" after being removed from office.

Mr Howard made a similar whistle-stop visit to Hobart last week for an $85 dollar-per-head cocktail party.

Tasmanians also go to the polls on Saturday and will decide whether Premier David Bartlett should be overthrown for Liberal Leader Will Hodgman.

Mr Howard was reportedly more interested in speaking about his new role as International Cricket Council vice-president but found a few words of encouragement for Mr Hodgman during an impromptu airport press conference.

"I'm impressed with the campaign he's run, he's fresh, he's new, he's appealing, he's intelligent," Mr Howard said.

"I think he's got a really good chance of winning.

"I sense that Tasmanians want a change and I hope they go the full distance of changing from Labor to Liberal and don't get stuck halfway with a hung parliament, that won't be good."

[Norman]

"This Government's been in power for a long time," he said.

John Howard said that?

[rhino]

"This Government's been in power for a long time," he said.

John Howard said that?

That's exactly what I thought!

[Aidan]

At the start of the year I thought it was very unlikely that I'd vote Liberal - after all, they were proposing inappropriate developments in the Parklands and in suburban locations, they were proposing irresponsible cuts to land tax, and they had a poor track record on services. Since then it''s come to light that the Liberal plan to build all that stuff is unlikely to be implemented and Labor have matched them on the irresponsible tax cuts. Rudd's plan for a federal takeover of health would limit the damage of any service cuts by the Liberals, while Labor's wasting money moving the hospital is ultimately a bigger threat to service provision. And Rann has become as arrogant as the Liberals traditionally are.

So I ask myself whether there's any reason to direct my preferences towards Labor.

And surprisingly the answer is yes, at least in the Lower House. I live in the electorate of Bright, and the sitting member Chloë Fox is a good one, whereas her Liberal challenger is unimpressive.

But does anyone in any other seat have any reason to favour Labor?

[Will]

Considering the bias shown against the government by the Advertiser, I thought I was in a parrallel universe when I read their editorial for election eve:

Editorial: Vote on Rann's record, not his personality

From: The Advertiser March 19, 2010 12:52AM

THE South Australian election campaign was encapsulated perfectly this week by two live interviews streamed on the AdelaideNow website.

In certainly their longest live and unedited interviews of the campaign, Premier Mike Rann and Opposition Leader Isobel Redmond took entirely different routes in putting forward the argument why their respective parties should be elected tomorrow.

Mr Rann followed a well-documented path. He concentrated on the Government's economic management and experience, blithely ignoring a growing crescendo of public unrest about government spin by doing just that. Often his answers were not even an attempt to answer the question.

While clearly not his controlled best, Mr Rann stayed on message with the sort of tale he hopes will still entice South Australian voters. He was focused, if not compelling.

Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.
Related Coverage
Sex, spin and down to the wire in South Australia The Australian, 10 hours ago
Hung parliament looms as likely poll outcome The Australian, 10 hours ago
Rann flip-flops on water deal The Australian, 2 days ago
Real battle for Rann and Labor Adelaide Now, 3 days ago
Parties neck-and-neck in campaign Adelaide Now, 4 days ago
End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.
In contrast, Ms Redmond appeared engaging and lively. Her message was the same as it has been for eight months. What you see is what you get.

Without hesitation, she handled challenging questions about religion, euthanasia and abortion in an open and exceptionally non-politic manner.

Ms Redmond showed the demands of the campaign have not slowed or challenged her determination and ability to send a strong message to the electorate. However, she too showed she can spin with non-convincing answers about policy detail, the performance of key members of her party and the Liberal Party's proclivity for leadership challenges.

Regardless of Saturday's result, Ms Redmond has enjoyed a remarkable rise in her brief time as leader. Her impact has carried the Liberals from a distant second to within reach of regaining government.

Premier or not, Ms Redmond's position as leader should not be questioned. If unsuccessful tomorrow, she should be given a full four-year tilt at government unfettered by petty internal politics.

Mr Rann, Premier for eight years and Labor leader for 15, faces a defining moment. He approaches an election which looked unlosable a few short months ago and is now balanced on a knife edge. He has been battered and bruised - physically and metaphorically - by the events surrounding Michelle Chantelois, who alleges an affair which the Premier denies.

Labor has been hit in the polls and voters say they don't trust the Premier. His loss of confidence and control has rattled senior members of his Government, underlining how much Labor relies on Mr Rann's controlling style of leadership.

Yet it is far from all bad for this Government. Kevin Foley, despite his many foibles, has carried out the order of transforming and modernising South Australia's economy. Yes, we still lag behind national averages in major economic areas, but our record is much improved. The state has an appreciably broader economic base, defence and mining promise much, unemployment is at historic lows and jobs continue to be created.

John Hill has handled the most testing portfolio of all - health - with aplomb. His plan to redevelop Royal Adelaide Hospital is the best (but not most popular) alternative.

As Infrastructure and Transport Minister, Patrick Conlon has been late arriving. but has introduced a long list of necessary and expensive public works.

While Mr Rann may be a master of spin, and is paying the price for that, when he talks about the economy and future development he is making a valid point.

Tomorrow, voters should consider this Government's record and not its image when making their choice. For that reason, Labor should be returned to office.

Responsibility for all editorial comment istaken by The Editor, Melvin Mansell,31 Waymouth St, Adelaide, SA 5000