Health Minister Michael Ferguson says the state government will not hand over public land at the Launceston General Hospital for free to a private company.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
On Thursday, Opposition Leader Rebecca White announced a policy to facilitate a health precinct around the LGH and a co-located private hospital on the corner of Charles and Howick streets.
She said a Labor majority government would provide the land, which is currently a car park, to a private hospital provider. However, the cost of the build would be covered by the private company.
It came after The Examiner revealed an unsolicited bid from Calvary was before the Office of the Coordinator-General, proposing a multi-level private hospital co-located with the LGH.
The new build would replace the current St Vincent’s and St Luke’s Calvary hospitals in Launceston.
On Friday, Mr Ferguson ruled out providing public land to a private company in kind, but said the government would consider the unsolicited proposal submitted by Calvary in December.
“We will not be giving away public land for a private company,” he said.
“There is a current proposal, potentially a very exciting one, for a significant investment here in Launceston, and we will consider it with an open mind.
“I was made aware of the proposal last month when it was lodged with the Coordinator-General’s office but part of the proper process is that a minister isn’t involved in that, until and unless it is shown that it meets the very strict criteria that an unsolicited bid proposal must meet.
“We’ll consider it, but what we won’t be doing is giving away public land on a public hospital site when actually our priority is investing in the LGH and the public hospital system.”
Deputy Opposition Leader Michelle O’Byrne accused the state government of being “secretive” about the current proposal.
“We want it to be transparent to ensure that whatever proposal is agreed to has actually been tested in the market and is the most efficient and effective to meet the needs of the community,” she said.
“The process that’s being undertaken by the Coordinator-General at the moment is secret so we don’t know how far advanced it is. We have, however, had initial conversations with private providers, so we think any work that they would do would transfer to a public and transparent process quite well.
“Our key is that whatever options are on the table should be transparent, should be open, and the public should know what they are.”
