Royal Adelaide Hospital
Friday, December 19, 2008
Hello to all friends of the RAH.
It is time that all South Australians and friends of the Royal Adelaide Hospital had the opportunity to air their views about the plan to close the RAH and build a new institution.
As chairman of the SAVE THE RAH ACTION GROUP, I invite you to add your thoughts.
Let the debate begin!
James Katsaros.
300 comments:
1 – 200 of 300 Newer› Newest»"If I'm really sick or injured I want to be in the RAH" is often said by Sth Australians. It is a precious and true sentiment borne of the traditions of high quality health care. We do not want to lose this. Let's preserve (rather than destroy) our State's icons.
Why not stick to the RAH redevelopment plan? We could have a world-class inpatient wing within 2-3 yrs at affordable cost. The advantages of staying on site far outweigh those of a new hospital at a remote location. Our Govt should think and act in a smart logical way
We do not need a new hospital with a new name. All we need is an upgraded hospital with modern facilities built in the most cost effective way. Upgrading the RAH at its present site will be the wisest thing to do in view of the current budget deficit of $94 million....
Throughout the developed world, major hospitals can be upgraded on site effectively, efficiently, and at less expense than replacement elsewhere. Added to the obvious advantages of continuing to function in close proximity to Medical and Dental schools and IMVS facilities, with the potential to expand to the North, the financial benefit of upgrading on site at a time of severe budget restraint is so obvious that the SA government must be encouraged to postpone the unwarranted MJN development.
Once again the S A Government is demonstrating that it is incapable of learning from it's own history and once again it's sole focus is spending money it doesn't have.
So, here is a suggestion for Mr Folley and the rest of the government.
If the new MJN Hospital is such a good idea and so universally popular why not call an election now and put it to the people who will have to pick up the pieces and pay the bills for this governments orgy of debt.
No doubt Mr Folley will be thankful the the voters of SA are so fickle, yes they may voice their dismay nay even show some disgust for five or ten minutes. Then all will be well again, the same as it was after the State Bank, Beneficial Finance and SGIC etc etc etc.
Yes the RAH needs upgrading and that is still a work in progress. More importanly the RAH needs nursing staff who give patients a higher priority than paperwork. Cleaners who actually clean and don't just walk past the dirt with the broom tucked under their arm.
Spend some money there Mr Folley at least that way the stroke patients may get someone other than another patient to feed them.
Yes the RAH may now ony be a 3 star hospital, however with some care, attention to detail and dare I say less money than is currently
"claimed" to be required for the MJN, it could get closer to the 5 star rating it should have.
As an old scholar I cannot believe that the Labour Party has suggested such a hair-brained scheme. There again we only need to look back to the State Bank to know that they as a group are not very smart. I have spoken to many current consultants and they are unable to tell me who came up with the idea. I am told that there are not enough operating suites in the proposed new hospital - some progress! And as has been alluded to by another commentator, can anyone imagine a more stupid idea than separating the IMVS, a world class institution, and the Medical School, from the hospital campus? Or is it Kevin's secret plan to move those West also at a later date?
It might help if some of the senior bureaucrats were locals. Bring back Bernard N!
i wrk at the RAH & find that with all this talk of a new hospital the pollies have taken into account of all the other facilitarys that r close at hand...what about the botanic gardens where alot of cancer patients go 2 4get their treatment 4 awhile..also no-body wants a new hospital they just want this 1 upgraded...its like why do we vote 4 these pollies that dont even listen 2 what the voters want...i say sack the lot & get some-one who cares about our community 2 decide whats best 4 the RAH..or better still have a vote & c how many ppl really want a new hospital...
The RAH is an iconic brand which cannot be replaced. Ask any doctor from RAH who has presented papers in Australia and overseas and they will know that RAH gives them credibilty and recognition.
The RAH was rebuilt on campus in the 1960s. It can and should be done again.
Where has common sense gone?
Dear Jim and colleagues,
I am glad that the medical group has now become a more proactive about this issue. There are great many concerns about the proposal for the New Adelaide Hospital. As a researcher I have found it astounding that this proposal has not given any consideation at all to the existing linkages to the Frome Road research and teaching precinct. I have published many research articles from the RAH, which as others have pointed out, has world recognition. It is ludicrous to lose this legacy. The little information I have heard about the new clinical pathway structure is also very concerning. The process appears to be driven without any adequate input from those actually delivering the clinical/teaching/research services.
Thank you for bringing this issue to the fore!
And for organising an avenue to express our amazement at this ridiculous idea. We have a world renowned and recognised health/medical facility .. why would we change the name and indeed the location??!! We need to retain the RAH name and reserve the railway site for a community based recreation plaza/South Bank/Riverside etc. Save the RAH both he name and the location!
I AM HAVING TREATMENT AT THE RAH LOVE THE STAFF THE RAH DOES NEED UPGRADING IN SOME AREAS BUT TO BUILD A NEW HOSPITAL IS REDICULOUS AND SO IS THE RENAMING OF A ICON THE TAXPAYER SUPPLIES THIS GOVERNMENT WITH ITS INCOME SO THEY SHOULD HAVE THE LAST WORD ON THE DECISION
Surely 1.7bn would go a long way to upgrade the major outer suburban hospitals even after 3-4m was spent on a new patient accomodation wing at the RAH. Unless that is the plan to phase out the suburban hospitals in favour of a centralised overcrowded super hospital - marj.
It is well time for this opportunity to comment, protest or winge. What a disgusting waste of money in this time in the world. As I live in a large country town and work for an emergency service hello! it is health services in the country we need. Mental health patients are shipped off to Adelaide EVERY DAY how about some money spent on keeping these people in their home town to be cared for. You would be amazed at the cost of transport for people to Adelaide only to be back in their home town on a bus the next day..... a new building is not going to help these people. Once again country services are forgotten. The RAH is SA keep it as it is please.
TAXPAYERS MONEY WASTED YET AGAIN!CAN YOU IMAGINE WHAT A LAUGHING STOCK WE WILL BE WITH A NAME LIKE MARJ. FOR GODS SAKE GET A BRAIN RANN @ FOLEY STOP WASTING TAXPAYERS HARD EARNED MONEY.
Dear Paul Reynolds
Thank you for emphasizing the irreplaceable links with research institutions-we need more people to voice their concerns about what the community will lose. The RAH belongs to the people and so both professional and ordinary citizens must take ownership of the debate-
Let us encourage more people to give their view.
Jim Katsaros
thank god for for people like you JIM KATSAROS to stand up and say what thousands of people are thinking KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.
When is the Rann Government going to realise the people who's money he is spending, do not want the MARJ. He ignored public opinion regarding the tram to nowhere, ruined the traffic flow in King William Street, now he wants to demolish a hospital that is recognised world wide. Ignore your voters Mr. Rann at your peril. Clean up the rail yards, sell them off to someone to develope, but hands off the RAH
I do not want a Marj I want to keep the RAH and save money. Who decided that we needed a new hospital and who decided that it would be called "The Marjorie Jackson Nelson Hospital" ?
Why weren't the people of South Australia asked?
What concerns me most is that everyone is talking about Adelaide hospitals, nothing mentioned about county hospitals. Could it be that the Governmet will build the Marj and shift most/all the services away from the country hospitals. I have noticed that some services have been closed down and moved to Adelaide already. Save the RAH and put more money back into all hospitals in S.A. and scrap the Marj.
I too work at the RAH, I am responsible for a very busy department that was also never consulted re: the plan. It's inspiring that so many want to stand up and be counted.
I have always voted Labour but this current Govt and Dept of Health have lost touch with the Adelaide Community, it's health workers and the patients it serves.
The 'Marj' is about politics,leaders fuelling their own interests and removing the 'RAH' influence from the equation. Nothing more nothing less.
I had hoped that the current financial situation would force a re-think of this unpopular plan. The estimated cost of $1.7billion is certain to blow out,and leaves very little money to be spent on mental health services, country hospitals and improvements to RAH while we are waiting for the MJN. Other writers have raised very valid concerns regarding the location and name change which seem to be widespread amongst the community. Ignore us at your peril!
As a long term member of the RAH community I too disagree with the governments plan to build the MJNH. There appear to be 2 agenda's 1. To destroy the good name all RAH staff have worked for since it was built and 2. To build a monument to the Rann Government whether the people of Adelaide want it or not. The RAH site is still large enough to uprgrade RAH to fine modern hospital which we can all be proud of and maintain the vital links to neighbouring learning institutions which are so vital for teaching the staff of tomorrow. SA needs to worry about priv/pub funding as the costs into the future could be enormous and break the SA budget. As most people, except our very valuable doctors who are in a protected position due to their skill shortage, most of RAH staff have been gagged and therefore I regret Im must sign off as 'Perturbed'. However, congratulations to the wonderful leadership of the RAH doctors! Perturbed.
I totally agree that a new hospital is NOT needed. What an arrogant attitude the Rann government adopted in not consulting you eminent surgeons administrators & other hospital staff who are using these facilities.Also how sad it would to be to lose the name of the R. A. H. which is world renowned.What a massively expensive monument to Mr. Rann a new hospital would be !
If the medical facilities provided in the Marj meets the requirements of the South Australian public 10 years hence it is not proper to reject it now. Fair question: will the "three" objectors still be around when the improved facilities are completed? The main objection is unfairly anti labour politically!
Thank goodness this group of doctors have finally voiced their opinion on the lunacy of the Rann Government's decision to build a new hospital. The Rann Government announced the decision to build 'The Marj' without consultation from the public and apparently without consultation from the persons most concerned, that is, the staff of the RAH. The RAH has a good name, and by its name associated with Adelaide. The service and care provided by the staff at the RAH are exceptional especially during times of family distress. Upgrade existing facilities. Rann, Foley and Co. get over your ego-trip and start listening to the people who placed you in office. Remember what happened to John Howard?
I fail to understand how the expenditure from memory I believe the sign said $75m for the upgrade of the emergency section of the RAH can now be discarded and destroyed. This is not smart use of tax payers monies but is disgraceful waste. This whole exercise to me seems to lack smart fiscal management as a patient of the RAH I can say that I have been treated both professionally and sincerley. I have nothing but respect for the RAH staff and believe that the issues raised by the Doctors and staff should listened to. Our own hisory and recent fiscal melt down was caused by so callewd "EXPERTS" who failed to listen to those urging caution. I am concerned this whole exercise will result in little or no benefit for taxpayers - I am sick of our monies being spent without consultation to those who will use the end product - I agree with the previous bloggers bring on a referendum - I don't know one person both professionally and socially who agrees with the proposed new building. As with most experts perhaps they need to get out of their sterile bubble and visit the real world to gain insightful informative perspectives of issues before embarking on such initiatives. As the health professionals have alluded to, the building is just one of many issues including the partnerships with keystake holders. As a tax payer I want to see a good return not increased taxation for SA community because expenditure has blown out. Flabbergasted
We do not need $1.7b of taxpayers money spent to build a new hospital to satisfy politicians gigantic egos, and put us in debt for years.
If the pollies believe people support the proposal then show some political backbone and put it to a referendum, where both sides can debate the matter and the PEOPLE make the decision.
Afterall, it is our money they intend to waste. Renovate the existing RAH and put the extra funds into other health services which we desparately need.
New hospital not needed,spend less on upgrade of RAH that is well know,great position,easy access for most.We need more help for mental health accommodation now that Glenside is being redeveloped.The best thing Rann & co could is to listen to the people who need to use these facilities and stop wasting our money.
Thanks for raising this issue. Of course the RAH can be renovated. As a theatre nurse I have seen a private hospital build a temporary theatre in an old maternity ward in order to ease disruption to daily operations and create a new theatre complex.
What short sited and uninspiring mind sets the govt. & public servants must have to not realise the tourism & cultural opportunities they are throwing away by not rethinking what is best for that railway site.
I'm sure the future development at the Clipsal site wpould rather walk past a boulevard of water and cafes than a hospital complex.
If Media Mike thinks we won't object because he named the hosp.after our old Gov. he has misjudged the mood .
Maintain the rage about this ludicrous proposal.
Judy
We may not need a "Marj" - as many have said it may be a more cost effective option to upgrade the RAH. But upgrade it to what? The bigger question surely is what part a future Marg/RAH should play in the future delivery of health services to South Australians. Some crystal balling into this important question has already been done with the development of the State Health Plan, but it is an enormously complex issue and needs much more clarity before we jump into either option.
Whatever model is adopted the process needs to be tranparent with public consultation unlike what occurred in this public hospital debate. One only needs to go over hansard and the questions which were raised prior to the demise of Beneficial Finance to realise the importance of a transparent system espercially when end users are protesting. Of interest those persons who denied any problems with Beneficial fiance and their loan practices ran for cover during the subsequent investgations and royal commisiosn. Most people of SA wnat change for the good of our community. Lets embrace the change by ensuring that the process is transparent and open not only to community debate by for contribution of health professionals. If there is nothing to hide then this request should be forth coming
I want to protest about how Mike and co. our servents have dictated to the voters and tax payers of south Aust. they are such a arrogant pack. Where is the 1.7b coming from in these tough financial times?? I would bet that Mike will now turn it around and reconsider the Marg. and blame those who have opposed it for it failing, talk about (come up smelling like roses)the sad thing is that this Govt. would have claim to doing 1 major project in their entire governing if it goes ahead. bob
I worked at RAH for >20years in an ancillary departmentr and was privileged to have the opportunity to serve RAH as a member of the Board of Directors from 1999-2004. That the present RAH needs upgrading was never in question, buldings age and technology and its requirements change. There was (is?) a redevelopment plan for the existing site, it did (does?) address the needs for a future of modern medical and surgical care. Then suddenly we have the MJN proposal. A fine excuse to not provide money for the immediate development and slow down the actual process. (When this proposal first surfaced I made a quiet personal objection in the normal public ways and did no more on the basis that being retired , perhaps it is better not to impose one's views on those still active there. ) Now that this campaign has been launched I am pleased to take the opportunity to add what little weight I have ,to support Mr Katsaros and his Committee in this camapaign and flag that from time to time I will add further comment on the context of the Government's unwise, unheralded and unecessary proposal.
D
This just shows how far removed the M Rann labor government is from the people and how arrogant they are hoping the people of SA will pay for their monuments (Marj, Desal plant). The RAH is central to the city for all transport needs and shops for patients visitors and staff, the Marj is to far from everything. The position for the Marj should be given back for park lands and the train maintenance depot removed to the original Islington site. Lets not give our children and grand children a debt like the State Bank. Bill
Rebuild/renovate the existing RAH. It is close to all facilities etc. I do not like the proposed new site or the plans for the new hospital. I oppose a name change as well. Instead close the Keswick Railway Station - all trains (local/interstate) should commence from the Adelaide Railway Station - a more vibrant station is needed in the city (look at Rome or Venice stations). The proposed site could be used for cheap accommodation, shopping area, etc.
Good on you David for speaking up. I wonder how many others are eager to do so but are afraid to because of the grip hold and micro management that this government has imposed on its public servants. Please let us all get on with giving the care to our patients that is so desperately needed. Why not put the public needs first for a change. Why not have a proper public forum on this issue, not the highly controlled clever survey that was recently published in the Advertiser which treated all SA citizens with absolute contempt? How stupid do they really think we all our. Good on you Jim Katsaros and all those who stand with you. God Bless
Perturbed
This decision was made by a small cohort within the government without any substantive consultation from the public (patients) or the doctors. It was pushed by faceless manderines within the department of health whose previous experience from their curriculum vitae does not appear to be in health managment.
The Margery Jackson Project was heralded as keeping us "ahead of the curve". If we proceed with this we may be viewed as being "around the bend".
If one truley believes they have a new way of organising hospitals on a patient accuity basis, it would make better sense to try this new system on a small scale such as at Norlunga or Lyall McEwen to see if it worked rather than begin with the largest trauma center in South Australia.
Good on the guys at the RAH for speaking out. This is commonsense not politicaly generated.Fix up the RAH as is and retain the current name. (This is not a blight on Marjorie Jackson) but we feel the royal Adelaide Hospital is respected world wide and is synonomous to the people of South Australia.Talk to the people first Mike! Stop trying to be a media magnate.
I have been a staff member at the RAH for 18 years. I have worked whilst we previously went through renovations and although noisy and at times maybe a bit inconvenient got through it. I
think everybody knows the RAH by its name and reputation. I think there should be a public vote about whether the MJN should be built. Mike Rann should take other opinions into account. I also believe that Marjory Jackson Nelson should have a backbone and maybe stand up and say thank you but no thankyou to even having it named after her. Even if there was to another hospital built who is she to have named after her. She isn't even a medical person. The renaming even to me is a slap in the face to all those who have trained, worked, been inpatient/outpatients and to those who lost loved ones at the Royal Adelaide Hospital.
I believe there should be an election and if public vote says NO then spend the money renovating what needs to be renovated. It can be done - just ask those who have worked through the revonovations before.
Thankgoodness a save the RAH group has been formed. We felt outraged to hear that our very central hospital was in the pipeline to be moved without the publics vote either.We appose a name change as well.Renovate and upgrade our existing RAH and put the extra funds to other medical facilites that we desperately need. Please leave our Royal Adelaide Hospital( that is well known worlwide ) alone!!!!!
I worked at the RAH in the 1970s when extensive rebuilding was done. There was a reluctance then to knock over the old buildings which proved useless for anything other than administration,The new nursing home built about then became unnecessary once nurses lived away from the hospital and out of the clutches of matrons who would be fired for bullying and harassment now. Resident doctors no longer live on the grounds. Surely therefore the "newer" nursing home, the "old" nursing home (that is, the one which was built without toilets and a swimming pool which filled with sewerage when the drain plug was removed could make way for a well designed new structure. History tells us that hospitals are initially poorly designed and need constant modification as the years go by. It would be reasonable to assume that the New Marg would be poorly designed, too small and too expensive, and need further changes almost as soon as it is opened. RMO.1965
I too would like to voice my protest re the Marj. A project being contemplated without consultation (just like the trams)- we will end up with what the Labor Party want us to have with the public having no say at all. There are also a number of issues to overcome; noise, contamination of proposed site, under the flight path, cost, inability to consider other worthwhile projects etc.
Listen to the people Mr Rann and co.
just fix what we have, where we have it.
And leave the name alone. if there has to be a name change..............Lord Howard Florey
Medical researcher
1898 - 1968
co discoverer of penicilin
The fact that stage 3 of QEH development is on hold indicates a cash strapped govt..It is worthwhile for other hospitals to consider supporting the present RAH,as if MJN is bult there will be no money for anything else!!!.
It is the height of arrogance to demolish and abolish the RAH without even a gesture of consultation with the community.We know what to do with out of touch polticians Mr Rann and Co !!
Looking at the proposed MJN ...low level buildings.I presume doctors nurses will be walking miles to get from A to B.Efficient???.
Its proximity to western suburbs may mean demolishing or downgrading QEH. Already stage 3 QEH is on hold.
What a mess this govt is making of our health system.Again what do you expect of Labor. Always running a deficit and putting us in debt.We have not forgotten John Bannon and Co and Marcus Clarke and cronnies.Nor have we forgotten Whitlam grand IDEAS.
The Sunday Mail article is fabulous.
I can imagine Mound and Sherbet choking on their marmalade.
I would feel the Robson could not be big enough and you might have to hire the Town Hall or Festival Theatre.
There’s a lot of dormant community hostility, and of course the QEH guys are mad that that place is falling to pieces (and will no doubt be allowed to fall to pieces for the next ten years) while the government pursues its trip to Fantasy Land.
Your very good point is emphasis of the RAH name and heritage. Despite what some may feel, the RAH is a greatly loved institution and it has been around since our Province was founded. The 150 year celebration at the Adelaide Oval was a truly memorable event and was packed out and for many it was an emotional event – I remember many of the nursing staff, past and present, proudly wearing their badges. I personally have an enduring love for the place, its traditions and all it stands for, and particularly my clinical teachers who I remember with gratitude and reverence. I’m proud to be an Adelaide graduate and all that means.
All this re-naming that the Rann government loves hasn’t always worked out for them. A few years ago when they decided to get rid of the Bakewell Bridge they were going to rename that. I started a local uproar and pointed out the role that poor old Bakewell played in Adelaide in the 1920s. They gave in and quietly dropped the idea. Some of the idiots also wanted to re-name various main roads around the place, but that came to grief also.
In collusion with the Salisbury and Port Adelaide/Enfield Councils they are also working on getting rid of Parafield Airport and the salt pans and converting it into another Mosquito Lakes . This has all been done with the very minimum of publicity. A group of us have now formed the Friends of Parafield airport Incorporated and have taken the fight to their desks.
Let’s hope they ditch this Marj Madness.
Reece.
It is not just about changing the name or the location of the RAH, it is about the respect and admiration we have for researchers who won international acclaim with their outstanding breakthroughs, the doctors and nurses who were prisoners of war in the line of duty, and the tutors and educators who have equipped all of us with the skills to save lives, and our mothers before us – in my case. Jim your comment about the Mayo Clinic and Michael Jackson is spot on, and with no disrespect to Marj, she wasn’t even born in South Australia! The proposed new location is fraught with potential fatal problems – a cement encased tramway impeding traffic along North Terrace and the accompanying overkill of traffic lights – recipes for disaster. The arrogance of a Labour Government without consultation is typical and unacceptable and you can we assured of the support of many of the nursing fraternity who like you Jim, are mortified at the perceived loss of the reputable Royal Adelaide Hospital identity. Sue Pearce Group 623 and supporters
I have been a critical care nurse for 12 years and agree that the "marj" is an unnecessary expense given the wide range of facilities we have already in place across Adelaide. The government needs to rethink the logistics of trying to centalize the health system in a state that is expanding North and South at an alarming rate. If nothing else let's hope they have the sense to call it something else. I doubt a hospital nicknamed "The Marj" (no doubt,30 seconds after the announcment was made) will have much credibility amongst the international medical and research fraternity. How about having a Marjory Jackson Nelson ward, wing or unit of some kind instead and retain the name of Royal Adelaide. Perhaps we could name it after someone who actually comes from South Australia - Adrian Johnson CCRN
I am a Public Health Physician and I have spoken out and written to John Hill from the earliest announcement of this hospital. As an employee of health department I have been sanctioned for the way I did this. There has been little opportunity to make public comment or meaningfully give feedback.
I am strongly against this hospital for the following reasons:
- The cost will almost certainly double over the next 10 years ($3billion) and almost the entire health budget (if not the State budget) will be directed to it for several generations. This means that there will be even less money for Primary Health care services and initiatives to keep people out of hospital. Quite the opposite notion of the Generational Health review!
- Public/private partnerships are notorious for Private profits and Public pays!
- Rather than being an innovative new concept, it is a rehash of the old mistakes having been made over the last 70 years almost everywhere in the world. Mammoth tertiary insitutions always gobble up the health dollar at the expense of preventive care and community health options. The truly innovative and modern view is to downsize hospitals into functional units (Day surgery hospitals, Cancer centres, Multipurpose Ambulatory Care clinics, Hospital-in-the- home, Step Down Units, etc). Get the " Aged Care" out of hospitals (the traditional reason for bed block). Many of these initatives are in place but are poorly funded or supported. If millions of dollars were put into these ideas they would really work.
The existing site should be re-developed, utilising much of the expensive renovations and buildings that are already in place.
I have been disappointed by the abscence of public protest from the Public Health community on this issue and call on my colleagues in AFPHM and PHA to come on board with this movement to prevent a Public Health catastrophy.
Dr Nicholas Williams
MB.BS, FAFPHM
An upgrade of the RAH would be a much smarter and cheaper option. Why doesn't the Government listen to the advice of the experts. Decisions like these shouldn't be made by public servants but by the professionals working within the environment.
As a hard working South Australian living in rural SA I would just like to comment on the proposed new hospital. Why is it necessary to build a new building, when we have a perfectly good one in place, spend money on the existing one & get it up to a state of the art hospital, this wil come at a lot cheaper rate than 1.7 billion dollar. Leaving money to be spent on other hospitals around the state. Consultaion must take place with the people at ground level & common sense must prevail.
PS leave the name alone
The Marjorie Jackson Nelson Hospital – what a ridiculous idea. As soon as it was announced I think everyone was astounded. Not just by the plan to spend this enormous amount of money on a new hospital without prior consultations with the medical fraternity, but by the scrapping of the name Royal Adelaide Hospital, which is world renowned. Could we see the NSW government scrapping the Royal Prince Alfred or the VIC govt scrapping the Royal Melbourne? Not on your life.
To scrap the RAH and build a brand new hospital from scratch is absurd. The cost will surely blow out as it always does on these huge projects so upgrading the RAH and spending the rest of the 1.7b on rural and mental health issues would be the clever way to go. Thank god the respected medicos have decided to speak out on the lunacy of this plan. Lets hope if we all band together as a community our voice will be heard and heeded.
As President of the Royal Adelaide Hospital Registered Nurses' Association, and on behalf of approximately 500 members, Dr Katsaros and the Action Group has our unequivocal support. Thus far I have not heard any one of our members approve of the proposal to abolish the RAH and buid a "new" hospital.
One of our members was in London last year and passed the University College Hospital on Euston Road, one of the busiest roads in London and noted that the hospital was new. She commented to the taxi driver and he said that they had just finished rebuilding it on site. Surely, if a city of 20 million can accomplish this then there is no excuse that we cannot do it with our population.
The international recognition of the clinical practice and research of both nursing and medical
faculties connected with the RAH is invaluable for the professions, state and nation and its name and location must not be lost.
Norma Neill,
President
per Heather Sutton
Treasurer
I, too, am in favour of the name Royal Adelaide Hospital. I'm also in favour of leaving it where it is. Upgrading is always needed. Technology moves so quick that anything new today can be obsolete tomorrow, the proposed MJN will not be immune from that.
Apart from that, the arrogance of the anouncement of this proposed MJN was quite a jaw-dropper
As a nurse who trained at the RAH in the 1970's, I'm extremely disappointed that the state government has taken the liberty to do away with an icon that means so much to thousands of nurses. Shame, shame shame. Surely upgrading would be suffice.
As former SA Heli retrieval aircrew, I'm honored to have served the people of SA in association with the fantastic medical & staff groups at the RAH. The main gist of the views so far call for the fostering of the RAH to evolve and meet the need. I read what's really needed is: "Re-develop the RAH" "Upgrade the RAH" and most of all "A New Patient Accommodation Wing for the RAH - ASAP"! OK, I believe and trust those of you who know the SA medical system and who know what’s really needed right now and in the future. All the politics aside, please believe me when I say you can achieve this mission very quickly! Not in 12 years or even 3. How about a new patient ward in about 180 days! No, how about two or three and what about extending the country hospitals and mental health facilities as well! Not at 1.7 Billion, not even 300 Million. How about a few million for wards in 2009, yes 2009! Plus whatever it costs to fit the facilities out? How do we get ward facilities now and how do we cover the need for the next 3-15 years, or until we can afford the agreed long term solution? The fastest, cost effective answer is with Semi-permanent, re-locatable, stressed membrane structure technology. A picture tells a thousand words. Just go to the website please: www.ldk.com.au I'm the Aust Rep for this technology and you will need to have a quick look to get the picture! The solution of expanding the RAH quickly is very achievable now! Across 90 countries globally and used by many medical facilities, these Structures are utilised for fast, cost effective infrastructure expansions and extensions to conventional buildings, especially hospital wards & wings! I was thinking there is room to place semi-permanent hospital wards or wings etc in the clear areas either side of Bartel Road, or on the south side of North Tce parkland and also behind the Frome St Research Centre. Dare I also suggest a semi-permanent wing at the Victoria Park Racecourse? Anyway wherever suits near and around the RAH, Semi-Permanent stressed membrane structure technology could take the pressure off the RAH to achieve any staged upgrades and re-developments as required in the shortest and most cost effective time. Lou - www.ldk.com.au I'm promoting a capability solution here for the People First and Always!
Anonymous
The Minister of Health announced to Parliament in October 2008 that "The Marj" would be an 800 bed facility. In fact the Minister of Health was misinformed by his beurocracy as it will in fact be 700 beds and 100 chairs.
The fundamental diference between a chair and a bed is that a bed is usable 24/7 and a chair is used 5 days a week from 9-5.
I think this highlights, that even in the most fudamental facts about the Marj, the minister is easily misinformed by his beurocrats, whom he relies almost entirely upon, for his information.
It is sheer folly to bulldoze the RAH when so much has already been spent on the emergency dept plus all the other upgrades. Precious money our government cannot afford to throw away on another whim so Mr Rann can see his photo yet again in the media. On many occasions whilst taking my sick mother to the RAH when the new casualty was being built we had to take detours and I was amazed how organized and relatively easy it was. It can be done and I would like to see a referendum take place. The RAH is an icon which should stay and with less money and time to rebuild, the idea of a new hospital totally abolished.
We oppose the building of a new hospital.
We oppose the suggested new location.
We oppose the name change and wish to retain the RAH.
We agree that the RAH should be upgraded in the departments deemed necessary by the medical profession.
We object that we, the general public, were not consulted about such a major development.
It should be put to the vote to ascertain the true opinions of South Australians.
Dear Norma Neill and Heather Sutton
Thank you for your show of support. We would welcome the involvement of the Registered Nurses Association. At first, we felt that it might take some time to bring this business to the attention of the medical profession - if the community response is overwhelmingly rapid, we may have to go straight to a public meeting. Watch this space....
Jim Katsaros
Where is the website for this group? We've searched high and low with no results. The ABC story claimed there was a website.
Whatever the case, with high levels of future deadly diseases due to nuclear radiation, and continued and increasing poor health habits among the general population, there should be NO transition to an ostensibly public (but really PRIVATE) health hospital to replace the PUBLIC Royal Adelaide Hospital. We must END the New-York-City-style Destruction ("Development") of Adelaide and South Australia. Andy Eastman/NONUKESA
The Royal Adelaide Hospital is where South Australians go to get the best medical attention in the world. SA citizens go there to live; and to die if that be the case. But they always know the Doctors and staff have their best interests at heart. Leave the hospital alone! I agree with the comments that $300 to $400 million should do the trick to bring the place up to beyond expectations. Some-one is again Empire building; and wants his or her name as that which people would refer to as to the Progenetor of a New Hospital. Shame. Save the money and the states iconic medical facility. Use this money to help alleviate the states water crisis; and the lakes. This government needs to learn to leave well enough alone; and divert its attention and guts to pull the upstream states into line about water. Enough is enough.
Good Luck in your quest
Rann managed to replace the $50m SA Water Head Office with a $160m one that has destroyed staff morale and caused SA Waters business to be dictated by the building, not the other way around. It is great that doctors can speak out on such issues - unfortunately SA Water staff that objected were trampled on and dis-respected with token consultation and denial.
I totally agreed with this group of doctors the lunacy plan of replacing the RAH with no or little consultation with the medical community. I suspect the Rann government cooked up this 'Marj' plan purely for political reasons i.e. excuse for not putting major funding into the RAH and hoping the voters buy into this $1.7bn plan and therefore keeping the Labour government in power longer to see it through.
I am a 3rd year medical student at Adelaide Uni and I want to save the RAH. Imagine the effect on the education of future medical students when they have no hospital nearby to gain experience. The convenience of the RAH's close proximity to the medical school is immeasurable. When I graduate, I want to work at the world-class Royal Adelaide Hospital, with it's new emergency department and state-of-the-art intensive care and surgical departments (which I have witnessed for myself), not the Marj. If there is a place for medical students to help you in this debate I am available. Best of luck!
Thank you Dr Katsaros for bringing this issue into a public forum. I too agree that we need to keep the RAH where it is. Sure, some of the buildings, especially the East Wing need a total revamp, but it has to be cheaper than building a new hospital, not to mention the cost of knocking down the existing buildings.
Let's not kid ourselves, no doubt the government will sell most of the prime land to developers for a quick buck.
And who was the genius that decided the iconic name "Royal Adelaide Hospital" could just be discarded without a single thought?
What about all the other services that are attached to the RAH? The services on Frome Rd, the Chest Clinic across the road on North Tce. Will patients need to travel the length of North Tce now?
Unfortunately, the govt probably won't back down because it would be a total embarrasment to them.
Let the people of SA decide - it's our hospital after all.
Dr Katsaros,
If you start an official petition to give to the government, I'll sign it without hesitation and urge all South Australians to do the same.
Thank goodness for these knowledgeable heroes of common sense, in starting the Save the RAH Action Group! It is not only the Medical professionals who want an end to the lunacy, but many thousands of "common" folk who also have more common sense than our politicians!
Ron A---From the Riverland--I totally agree with eminent Doctors--typical of the Rann Gov.announce a proposad new hospital without any consultation with the people who know best--the Doctors. I have had cancer treatment at the r.a.h.--top class facilities--spend the money upgrading what is necessary at the r.a.h. instead of a new hospital in the proposed location--which will have a major blow out of costs--forget the "Marj"--listen to the people Mr Rann
I am yet to be convinced that appropriate works on the existing RAH are not better spent monies than the government's proposal. Both the name of the proposed hospital and it's location are entirely inappropriate, but I don't expect our government to understand that, when they have demonstrated to me, in more than one instance, that their knowledge of local matters, and of understanding consequences, is wanting.
Forgive them Lord, for they know not what they do!
We are in support of your campaign in keeping the RAH as is, upgrading exisiting facilities and leave the heritage RAH name alone. Rann needs to consult the tax payers which will be paying for this extravagant project and not just leaving his so called legacy and large footprint on South Australians to pay forever. Health is a large component of the budget and should be spread around that state, not just a hole for the Marg!!
Concerned Family in the Murraylands.
To all RAH supporters ,PLEASE lobby your MPs and state clearly your opposition to this totally pie in the sky project to save our subsequent generation the mortgage payment on the massive loan/debt to finance this nonsense!!
Well done Dr. Katsaros and co. You have my full support. I assume you realise you are in for nothing but abuse and bullying from 'Rannbo' and K-Fol. That is their approach to anyone who dares question their judgement. That a group of ordinarily conservative doctors are prepared to stick their necks out speaks volumes about the lunacy of the Marj and the consequences of destroying the world renowned RAH. So stand firm and get the ball rolling. Public meetings, petitions, get the Liberal opposition involved and set up an appeal to fund an information campaign. Turn this into an election issue in the same way Work Choices was. This can be stopped but it needs a concerted effort in rallying everyone together. Surely I'm not the only long standing Labor voter who has had a gutful of this arrogant government. Come 2010, I WILL be voting to vote them out.
There is clearly a massive public and health professional response to this proposal in favour of retaining and upgrading the RAH, on the present site. I agree with virtually all of the comments, each one reflecting a unique facet of opinion or experience of people who feel strongly enough to log their comments.
Many cogent and rational ideas have been put forward, in particular the powerful argument on behalf of the reputation of RAH which has been built over many decades of excellence and which geographically locates the hospital instantaneously in the mind of anyone who hears the name. The idea of dedicating a wing to Margery Jackson-Nelson(maybe the patient residential section) is one which allows a gracious way out of the folly of naming a new hospital after an individual who has made no particular contribution to health or the advancement of medical knowledge.Practical arguments in favour of upgrading specific services on site have also been advanced and any good construction company has the capacity to selectively work thus without structurally compromising other buildings. The goodwill of staff and patients who see renovations proceeding and know that it is in everyone's best interests cannot be underestimated. Goodwill means that people go above and beyond everyday concerns, for the greater good. This is the fabric which has been woven by generations of clinical staff, researchers and all the support staff who keep the RAH running 24/7, and which we are seeing and hearing about in this Blog site. I fully support Dr Katsaros and colleagues who have put out these initiatives to truly engage the public and the voters of SA, as their opinion counts. I strongly suspect that there will be massive public displays against the "Marj" once the energy to retain the RAH has been galvanised into action after March 16th.
The RAH is a South Australian icon. The Government has provided no reason to change the name. It is the height of folly and arrogance from a group of politicians who are out of touch. This should be an electoral issue in 2010. There was a similar outcry in WA during their last election which the Liberals ended up winning from Labor. The same should happen here.
Very gratifying to read that so many people are in favour of retaining and upgrading the RAH. I wrote to my local MP voicing my concerns and he passed my letter on to the Health Minister. In his reply, none of the points I had raised were answered, all I got was political spin. A huge thankyou to Dr Katsaros for giving us hope that our voices might be heard!
Please keep up the fight on behalf of all South Australians. It is madness to build a new hospital - inject $'s into RAH - all Rann et al are doing is building an icon for themselves - and placing taxpayers at even more risk
In 2006 during treatment for Lymphoma I got to know a number of specialists and staff of the RAH. I have the utmost respect and gratitude to the IMVS Patient Clinic, the chemo ward, the radiatherapy specialists and staff and dental specialists and staff. To see the lifeblood of the RAH destroyed and the IMVS strangled by Gov stupidity is a crime. We dont need a new hospitaql just leave the existing one to do what it does best and leave the IMVS to do what it does best. Why do our politicians have to build momuments when all we need is the existing one upgraded and the staff reccognised for the brilliant experts they are. A public thankyou to Professor To and Assoc Prof Roo and all their staff for my life and may it be a long fruitful one where I too can make a difference
Sharon Fahey
The RAH never closes and does not go on bypass. It has always been the hospital that copes with what ever comes. Does the minister appreciate this great tradition of the Adelaide?
As a silent supporter of the RAH I was amazed at the decision to relocate. I watched with interest at the result of the Today Tonight survey. Surely if the decision was based on sound reasoning then the South Australian community would have transparent debate about the issue. If Mr Rann has nothing to hide then why not engage after all isn't he a proud South Australian also doesnt he want the best for S.A. what has he to hide Proud supporter of the RAH
Thank you for leading the way to save the RAH.
1. Saving the name off the RAH as it is such icon to SA.
2. The cost involved in moving the RAH is ridiculous when we have a fantastic Facility which can be upgraded in different areas.
3. The money saved on upgrading RAH could go to doing other projects for the state.
4. The location of the RAH is perfect eg IMVS, Hanson Centre, Medical School, the Universities, plus it is a vibrant area of North Tce.
5. I feel that the Government is very arrogant just to decide on the Marj. Jackson with out consultation
6. This Government needs to live with reality and listen to the voters of SA, hopefully voted out at the next election as THEY ARE SPENDING MONEY THE STATE DOES NOT HAVE!!
7. We do not want the Government to jeopardise the States future as they did with the State Bank fiasco.
Keep up the good work its fantastic that Save the RAH Action Group. Has the passion and belief to save our great icon.
In no time,under 2 yrs ,the old ETSA bldg Greenhill Rd was gutted and transformed into a modern luxurious 21 st century bldg.The same can be done for RAH !!!
John Hill consuled the beurocrats to make up his mind,not the workers at the coalface.YES MINISTER!!
As a Senior Clinician at the RAH for the past 23 years, I fully support the assertions of Mr J Katsaros with regard to the name change of the Royal Adelaide Hospital. This name change reflects a total lack of consideration for the many thousands of people who spent countless years of dedicated service at the RAH. How could anyone justify this decision without proper debate or discussion? The nane of the RAH is recognised and respected world-wide and many retired individuals as well as former international clinicians would be devastated to find out that the institution that they trained and worked in is no more!
I know that I will always state proudly that I have spent many decades at the RAH.
It appears that the Golden Rule in Medicine is about to be breached-ie; FIRST DO NO HARM.
Experience both, globally & locally clearly dictates that the mixture of politics & Medicine, almost certainly results in an immiscible solution.This is accentuated when there's a marked lack of consultation with those who matter. The seemingly impulsive decision to build "the marj", appears to my mind like a sudden,manic "good idea at the time" job. It lacks any form of of logic, and is heavily steeped in completelack of insight at the Clinical/Health Care Delivery interface.Excellent examples of rebuilds in this Country are,The Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, (adjacent to Sydney University), St. Vincent's Hospital Sydney (Dr Victor Chang Institute),& The Prince of Wales Hospital (adjacent to The University of N.S.W.) All remain Centres of excellence-Just as The RAH shall continue to be.
I was so glad to read the article in the Sunday Mail. I thought I was the only one to have objections to the building of the "Marj". I have many concerns: the lack of consultation with the people of SA about what they want, spending an obscene amount of money to decomtaminate the site before they can even build, the naming of the new hospital, the loss of the RAH name and why such a huge hospital which surely would create super problems. Given the current economic climate surely the money would be better spent on the current hospitals serving SA and finally giving them the financial resources they need to run. It all smacks of another State Bank Disaster in the making.
I am yet to hear an excuse why John Hill and his advisers didn't consult with the relevant stakeholders when making such an important decision. The public and people who have worked at the RAH deserve better. And why such a stupid name? Is Marjorie Jackson-Nelson such a megalomaniac that she thinks she deserves to have a hospital named after her? She should have declined.
Having been a graduate nurse completing her old style hospital training at the RAH among the top 7 credits that went to our group about 40 years ago; I am delighted so many people are able to express their opinion that extensions and improvements should be made to the current buildings and the name be retained. Any RAH trained nurse is regarded as receving an excellent training and is valued where ever she, or he, seeks employment, be that in Australia or overseas.
On The Today Tonight Survey 92% wanted the RAH to stay why does Mr Rann want to tear it down. It is time for transparent debate for the good of our SA Community
Dear Mr Katsaros,
Naturally, the initial response to any proposal for a "new" building proposal is one of excitement and expectation. But Mr Rann and the labour govt have made an enormous blunder with this one.
Can you imagine The Royal Marsden Hospital being bulldosed to later be rebuilt elsewhere as the "Seb Coe Hospital" or the Mayo Clinic being levelled and built elsewhere as the "Florence Joyner Hospital"! Ludicrous.
Can you imagine being asked to give a scientific presentation at a prestigious meeting and being introduced to the audience as "Dr Smith who hails from the Marjorie Jackson Nelson Hospital"!!!! Where's that???!!!
As a member of the "younger" surgical consultants at the RAH, I agree that it is time to show our rage at this proposterous proposal by the Rann Govt. The history of the RAH is unparalleled by any hospital in South Australia - and, arguably, Australia. I am happy to support this action group in any way locally, nationally or at the international level. The enormous number of national and international Fellows who have trained at the RAH will no doubt give their support as well.
Good luck.
James Kollias
I totally agree re the new hospital the RAH should be renovated and brought up to standard instead of wasting our tax payers funds on a pipe dream which will more than likley blow out
I am yet another tax payer who does not want money wasted on a new hospital that is completely unnecessary. Spend the money wisely and upgrade the RAH. The Rann government continues to demonstrate it's complete incompetence in running this state and it's time they were given the boot. Rann is an utter disappointment, dare I say embarrassment, as a premier (but then again, what would you expect from someone who looks stoned all the time). Folley is just as bad, more interested in chasing after gold-diggers half his age. The desal plant is just another hair-brained scheme that is sure to become an absolute environmental disaster. Time for a new government that is better equipped to save this state.
Given that it's our (the taxpayers) money, and we don't want the expense of a new hospital, and we live in a democracy, why are they still insisting on building it?
I read your article in the paper and TOTALLY agree with you. There is nothing wrong with the RAH where it is and moving it to somewhere else, is a total waste of money!! Spend the money on something else. It's not like we haven't got a hospital already. Just do up the RAH - it's not going to cost that much in comparsion to building another one!!
Regret having to add to my above remarks, but, I have worked at Gyes, Barts, and The Royal Marsden Hospitals in UK, and all have been successfully rebuilt, without any/little inconvenience to anyone.I also refer to NSW Hospitals above. All remain centres of Excellence at a Global Level
I agree Leigh. There are literally hundreds of famous hospitals around that have successfully rebuilt on their original location. Why is the RAH supposedly the only hospital in the world that has to be destroyed and have it's name changed? What is wrong with our bureaucrats?
I am surprised that the Advertiser is following the Labor Party line so closely. It's so bad that you could almost imagine Mike Rann sitting down with Mike Mansell, his old journalist buddy, to work out what the Advertiser will say about the Marj.
Bill Nicholas wrote this piece in the Independent a week ago. I have copied it here so that those who wish to read it, can do so easily. Villis Marshall has replied with his views as to why the Marj should be built. Readers can access his article by searching the Independen's website.
Doctors remain dubious about Marj hospital plan
BILL NICHOLAS
19/01/2009 2:18:00 PM
When the SA Government announced a year ago that we were to get a new $1.677 billion hospital, it was news to most of the medical profession.
The heads of departments around the Royal Adelaide Hospital had been summonsed at short notice to a press conference at the Hilton where they heard for the first time the government “endorsing the procurement of the centrally located $1.677 billion Marjorie Jackson-Nelson Hospital to replace the Royal Adelaide Hospital and to accommodate certain specialty services from The Queen Elizabeth Hospital through a Public Private Partnership procurement model”.
Despite a lot of consultation since then the doctors are even less crazy about the idea today.
The AMA is prepared to speak out on the issue, but there are any numbers of doctors lined up against the Marj, as it’s been called – probably to get everybody arguing about the name instead of the dubious logic of the plan. But the doctors can’t be quoted because they’re employed by the government-owned hospital and their jobs are worth more than getting their names in the paper.
They have a number of objections to the Marj. In building the Marj, the government’s health team is trying to introduce a whole new approach to the hospital experience.
Talking in jargon is just the start: “Consultation to work through the draft model of care for the MJ-N Hospital and to inform the work related to the functional brief has continued throughout 2008,” the Health Department annual report said.
“This process has been undertaken at a number of levels, including patient journey focus groups, individual consultation meetings with clinical leaders, meetings of subspecialty groups related to their patient journey and attendance at a range of relevant groups including clinical networks, heads of clinical units, consumer advisory councils, specific clinical groups and senior management meetings.”
Perfect for the comrades at the nurses union who think in terms of “patient journey” but like a lot of modern developments like sub-prime investor journeys, that consist of chucking out all the accumulated wisdom and practice of the past 100 years and let these “experts” destroy a well-functioning industry, the “draft model of care” is really annoying the doctors.
Part of this patient journey focus group model is for the new Adelaide hospital not to have all the eye patients, say, lined up in an eye ward where specialist staff can concentrate on them properly.
The new modern hospital will have the neurology patients recovering alongside trauma victims, respiratory cases along with burn victims – and all this will be possible because the nursing staff will be performing to a new model of care in that patients will be grouped as to their acuity – or level of illness.
“It’s a well-known fact,” says AMA President Peter Ford, “that outlying cases (where say an eye patient is located away from the eye ward) don’t recover nearly as well because they’re out of touch with the appropriate clinical staff.”
Ford takes issue with the proposed increase in number of beds from 680 (at the RAH now) and 800 for the Marj.
“One hundred of these are going to be chairs for day surgery patients – with no capacity for overnight stays at all,” says Ford.
The AMA is also disappointed it has no role in considering options that can be compared with each other. Everything is presented as a fait accompli. The whole thing was announced as a done deal.
The size of the hospital is shrinking already, according to Dr Ford. “It started out at 170,000sqm and the latest drawings are for 140,000sqm.”
But the doctors still cannot understand why the Marj idea bobbed up in the first place. When the Rann team won power in 2002 the RAH was well into a four-stage renovation plan that kicked off in 1990. Three stages had been completed – with excellent surgical and intensive care wards – and the planning all done for stage four – when the new Rann team put it on hold.
“So practically nothing’s been done at Royal Adelaide since 2001 and the place is falling apart,” the doctors say.
An exception has been the transfer of the renal transplant unit from the Queen Elizabeth to the RAH at a cost of $15 million.
Page: 12single pageComments
Date: Newest first | Oldest firstthey should build a new hospital, the old one will just keep fulling apart, its to old & will cost money all the time. the new hospital will be good for 60 years plus before it start to full apart, & they need to put in 4,000 new beds so they can take the weight of the other public hospitals that are over work; so they can send 500 people from the other public hospitals too the new hospital, freeing up 500 beds in all the other hospitals in the state, so the main hospital will have abut 4,000 new beds, & if you take 500 people from all the other public hospitals & send them to the new hospital there will be like 2,500 taken, then they will still have 1,500 bed free. So take that weight of the other public hospitals, less people, more doctors for the emergency department that is in shatters, so people will get in on the spot & seen. All the other public hospitals are the problem, if you upgrade the new hospital with 5,000 extra beds, it will fix the problem for a very long time to come.. Even if they built 5,000 beds & only 3,000 will be used, they could just have the room there with beds in them not being uses,& only employ a cleaner to keep it clean unto time comes when they start to fill up again , so just have the room there with the beds, no machines yet & clean them unto they are needed..
In response to the argument in favour of building the MJN, and that it will provide 1,000s of extra beds, can you tell me where the government is going to get the staff (doctors & nurses etc) to provide the services fo patients? Hospitals are struggling now to find enough staff so if there are more beds they will certainly remain empty. In fact in the '80s and '90s the then Health Commission REDUCED the number of beds in all public hospitals and closed the Queen Victoria as well as many services at TQEH.
I do not understand the logic of any of this.
Plastics Outpatients Nursing Staff -RAH.
On behalf of the Nursing team who work alongside Mr Katsaros and many other Medical Consultants, we would like to congratulate the "Save The RAH " team and express our support in the actions of the group.With a combined experience of over 100 years of Nursing we have been dismayed and disappointed at the lack of consultation with decisions being made surrounding the new hospital and are equally as devastated about the change of name proposal for the new hospital.We are all exceptionally proud to be associated with the RAH and have always felt that our reputation as clinicians has been unquestionable when dealing with other health facilities and community groups as the RAH has always been recognised as a centre of excellence, innovation and research throughout the world.We feel it would be quite devastating to lose the name Royal Adelaide Hospital.It would feel like losing our identity and would, in a significant way lower our morale as workers.It may be, for some, the impetus for rethinking our continued employment at the hospital.This , of course will impact greatly on patient care as to lose the experience of this group of Clinicians will surely affect the outcome of treatment recieved by the patients under the care of the RAH.We urge all Nursing staff to support the actions of this group and will voice our opinions alongside Mr Katsaros and his collegues willingly.
There is a lot of disinformation from the Government and it's spin doctors about the need for a brand new hospital. Why do they want to get rid of the RAH name and it's worldwide reputation? Is all this just an excuse to close the QEH?
Congratulations Jim on providing this website to give everyone the opportunity to voice there opinion on the proposed MJN.
I read with great interest the comments placed here by a variety of people from all walks of life including staff and general public so there is a good cross section of opinion.
I am an existing employee of the R.A.H. and have worked here for over 20 yrs and would like to pose some questions as I believe there is a valid argument for and against the building of the MJN.
I will try to stick to the facts and not cloud this space with emotive comment, and I have nothing to gain if the M.J.N. is built or not.
The existing R.A.H. site does have significant problems that do need to be considered when arguing for and against the MJN, and I have placed these in no specific order of importance.
The existing R.A.H. site is landlocked and offers little scope for expansion, bordered by nth terrace, Frome rd, Botanic Gardens.
A large section of the existing R.A.H. which has not been renovated recently is full of asbestos and its removal is of significant cost.
I have seen and been apart of previous renovations and anyone who witnessed this is aware of the considerable interruption which occurs.
What about the existing R.A.H. infrastructure…i.e. services, water, gas, electricity, much of which is past its used by date and is merely patched up due to lack of parts and age.
Even the larger buildings which can be renovated internally are suffering external structural faults.
Renovating existing buildings have restrictions like existing stairwells, lift wells, column locations, service riser ducts etc.
Some of the Buildings on the R.A.H. site are Heritage listed and restrict the redevelopment which can occur.
The Proposed M.J.N may provide us all with a “NEW” clean platform to move into the future, although I would like to see the R.A.H. name retained.
Some side issues are.
At the 1st Staff information session held in the E.H.B. lecture theatre, the Health Minister stated that with the new M.J.N. that no clinical positions would be lost, so where does that leave all the existing R.A.H. non clinical staff, are we without a job when the M.J.N. comes on-line, what policy exists now to cover our future employment, have the relevant unions considered this.
The existing Govt has publicly stated that the M.J.N. will be subject to a referendum held at the 2010 election, so it may go ahead, or the public may have an opportunity here to say no, pending on the wording of the Referendum.
If the public was to vote for a new hospital M.J.N. or R.A.H. by name, under the proposed Public Private Partnership (P.P.P.), given the current world wide financial turmoil what would happen if the funding was not available and no large consortium comes forward and wishes to take on this project?
When arguing for or against the R.A.H. / M.J.N, we all need to put aside our personal gains and try to argue what is best in the long term for the public of S.A.
At his seminar, Tony Sherbon made it clear that he was not guaranteeing all non-clinical positions would be retained. He hoped to save money on these jobs when the RAH and QEH were amalgamated into the MJNH.
Just how committed is this govt committed to the M.J.N.
If we are to look at the sequence of events around the media release to the Public of the M.J.N. it raises some interesting questions.
From the 1st media release we have been presented with Architectural drawings/perspectives/elevations which show a lovely new hospital.
Has anyone questioned the fact that a private Architectural firm was working on this for 18 months prior, what information had they been given to produce this, size, facilities etc, and who was consulted at such an early stage, seems a lot of decisions were made very early with no consultation as usual from the staff who would be working in this new hospital.
There is a dedicated team in the R.A.H. at present working on a brief for the new M.J.N. as we have been reliably informed at staff information seminars…but I thought we were going to vote on the new hospital 2010..?
One couldnt possibly argue the quality and commitment of staff past and present of the RAH and the invaluable services and support that they provide to the community.
But I do wonder if a true estimate has been made or even considered of the upgrade in total by the save the RAH members.
In conversations with various staff members supporting an upgrade of the RAH that I have had, it seems that the cost of replacing and upgrading existing infrastructure hasnt come into the equation.
Has anybody asked of the condition of existing plant, boilers, pipework, removal of hazardous substances, the standard of electrical wiring, the structural integrity of buildings or the condition of all the lifts on site to name but a few areas of importance that will require replacing or improving.
I'm all for upgrading what we have as long as what we get isnt all eye candy with no forethought to what supplies all these facilities/services in the future.
$1.7BN??Expect it to blow way out,as the desal plant and every other project has and will.I praise the doctors and specialists for speaking out.Upgrade the RAH and put the rest into other health avenues.One only has to walk down Semaphore Rd on any day to see all the lost souls who need better mental health care facilities.
All that we have done is ask that the government enter into discussion with us and the public regarding the merits of rebuildind the RAH or building the MJNH.
Our position is that it is better to rebuild the RAH on site, retain its close proximity to important organisations like the IMVS, University and medical school and retain the name.
A responsible govt. would have done in the first instance do a feasibility study, comparing the merits of rebulding vs a new hospital and its costing.It would then go to the public with each plan and let the taxpayers decide.Instead all we get is announcements of fait accompli.
Clinicians already see the effects of money diversion from essential projects such as stage 3 QEH shelved indefinitely,disgraceful waiting time in ED, Glenside plan uncertainty,14 mths avg waiting list OPD etc etc
I suspect monies are going to `consultancies` for the new project.
Despite 80% of taxpayers not wanting this MJN, John Hill is adamant it will go ahead.
I thought govt is by the people and for the people.
No matter who is in power a Referendum is a must for a project that will cost our next generation huge mortgage to pay off.
We must resist with all our means this unneccessary project that will decimate State finances and health care of this State for decades.
Another thing: Public?private consortium does not work ...just look at Modbury.
Dear deserttraveller,
It's good of you to add your thoughtful comments. Our hope is that more people will ask questions and generate discussion.
If the condition of the pipes, boilers and lifts is poor and irreparable as often stated verbally and in writing by Prof Villis Marshall,(one of the govt spokespeople in this debate) then why not knock over the 9 level Nurses Home, build a new pt. accomodation tower NOW. If the redevelopment programme had been followed that building would have been completed by now. It would be illogical to wait 10 years for the MJNH to be built if
the boilers are ready to explode "anytime".
If you are in any doubt about the structural integrity or quality of existing buildings, go to the Level 6 Renal Dialysis Unit. It has been refurbished in the most stunning and utilitarian manner-spacious, light-filled and sparkling-pure serenity.
It is yet another example of what can be done if you have any pride in
S. A's most important and valuable institution(arguably). When you're the driver of a Bulldozer, there's only one thing on your mind....
Keep on with the discussion!
Jim Katsaros.
No staff no hospital. This is my approach. I am a consultant at the RAH. I have worked there as trainee and now senior VMS for 18 years. I simply will not move across to the new hospital if it goes ahead. The staff makes a hospital not the bricks and mortar and wires and computers and new paint! Remember the airport. The moment the new airport got the go ahead the old airport was immediately ignored and decayed. The same thing will happen to the RAH. The new hospital will, like all modern building design, look good for a while but in 50 years will look worn-out. The current RAH will in 50 and 150 years always be a statement of majestic design and build quality. In essence it will never age.
IF OTHER STAFF MAKE IT KNOWN NOW THAT A NEW HOSPITAL WILL NOT HAVE THE DOCTORS, NURSES, TECHNICIANS AND CLEANERS THEN THERE WILL BE NO NEW HOSPITAL.
I propose a letter to the SA government with the names of current staff who will to go to the new hospital. This will give them a lot to think about.
The proposal is for a list of current staff who will not make themselves available to staff the new hospital.
The Parliament House is so old John Hill that I propose the govt. moves into the the Marj. ,and let the public remain in this so old RAH building.
How about that ?
I agree with Mark. Just looking at the North Wing one can see it is built with quality.I am certain that lifts ,boilers,pipes are not beyond the genius of our 21st century engineers.To make this as an excuse to buldoze it down is absolutely laughable.Villis Marshall should find more solid reasons.To describe RAH as landlocked is also feathery.The Hospital can go up. Nurses qtrs can be buldozed or Dental School can be moved to Marj. site.
I have learned over the past 50 years NEVER to trust politicians. So let the experts(architects) decide what is the best way to improve the RAH or start a new hospital. The timing of spending billions is definitely wrong at this time of financial chaos.Let common sence prevail.
Why does Mike Rann not listen to the voice of the people? The time for circuses is over.
Retain the RAH both in name and place. Upgrade the RAH and use the money saved to repair our water infrastructure. Stop water mains bursting and save the Murray and the public purse.
Margaret Visciglio.
The name Marj is an insult to the traditions of service that the RAH has given South Australia. I am proud to say that many years ago I trained as a nurse at the RAH but I would be ashamed to be associated with an institution called the Marj in any way.
If Mr Rann persists in his hubris I will not vote for him at the next election.
I have learnt when looking at leaders there is very little difference to the leaders of the past and today. I have been told that the Sherriff of Nottingham is still alive and the diversionary practices of the Romans to the masses differ little today. I have observed that leaders like to give the masses a distraction to prevent any analysis of the important matters at hand i.e. the moving of the RAH - as a consequence we have Mike Rann and the Tour Down Under. Mike Rann and the Clipsal, Mike Rann and any other event which comes along and diverts the masses from conducting any analysis of the merits or otherwise of any proposed initiative which is being explored/investigated. I seem to recall another initiative which went this way involving the relocation of a government department in controversial circumstances. If there is nothing untoward then surely the Government would open the doors for discussion. What are they hiding? At the end of the day surely we are about doing things better and if end users cite a problem then surely they are in the best place to identify any issues. It is apparent that there had been a calculated plan to move the RAH for sometime as a member of the public I have eyes and I saw how the QEH was being led to demise with little or no maintenance while I attended this facility as a patient. Suddenly it was politically advantageous to get on the band wagon to save the QEH and funds were forth coming. Long overdue maintenance issues which my lay eyes saw as a patient were suddenly repaired. Now the government wants the RAH to move and not surprisingly it is apparent that little money is being spent on maintenance strategies and the gov ernment is embarking on a campaign of public ridiculing our health professionals without knowing the truth and the facts. Low and behold there is now little or no money for other capital works in the health arena. It has often been said the media and our leaders never "let the truth get in the way of a good story". The story in today's Advertiser says it all. The issues involving drug/alcohol induced patients assaulting our health professionals has been a long standing issue for some time with little or no support by the government to address this plight. As a member of the community all I can see if the governments attraction to maximise the all mighty buck. The government is selling off land and Glenside and Hampstead Centre with little or no regard to the impact that the relocation of patients will have on the RAH Emergency Departments and RAH services in the future.
The problem is that South Australia needs a statesman who has the true heart of South Australians to ensure that changes are made for the betterment of our children. I hoped Mr Rann was a true South Australian with the best of interests of South Australians at heart and not a disciple of the "buck". If this is the case then he knows exactly what needs to be done. I am not in the medical profession and have never worked in this area. However I am a South Australian - when something stinks I don't need taste the meat to confirm that the meat is off. Please Mr Rann open this up to debate, don't let your ego get in the way. This issue is bigger than you - think of the people of South Australia – listen to our health professionals after all I wouldn't ask a politician to operate on me. Experience tells me we should listen to those who have most experience in the area - please don't forget you are a representative of the people; you are not the people and as a swinging voter I believe that all representatives need to remind themselves of this fact.
I would like to thank and congratulate the SAVE the RAH committee for making a stand.
The Silent Majority
if the gov. has so much trouble getting a 50mil progect up and running(the marion pool), just think how they will go with a 1700mil progect?!
What should have been done in the first place 18 months ago was to have asked the people what they wanted!!! Maybe now is the time to ask them by having reforandum. Why anyone would want to move a hospital that is located to all it's necessary counter parts IMVS, Medical School, Nursing Scool, Hansen Resach Insitute. IS Madness.
Mr Rann needs to wake up and ask the peolple of South Australia!!!!
2 other facts have emerged:
1 The site for MJN is actually Parkland and prohibited from any development.To bypass this declare it as Major Development!!!What a cheek!.
2 The cost to Clean-Up extra 200 millions.
Let us face it :The govt has no such money to complete this white elephant.
Health Minister John Hill, born 1949(Wikipedia) refers to "those near the end of their working lives". Mr Hill would do well to appreciate that Churchill was seventy at the beginning of World War 2. It's called experience, John!
I am shocked and offended that Minister Hill would take such an offensive swipe at Medical Professionals who are simply trying to ensure the best quality care for their clients.
My observations of the past week indicate to me that the government lacks both logical judgement and insight.
A alot of South Australians could have been warned in advance about the impending power shortages to their area as there was a list which was sent out to various government departments advising which suburbs and proposed outage periods for that day.
Sadly no one thought that the community of SA needed to know this information and so families who may have arranged to have elderly, pregant women or the very young moved to areas which would not be affected had to endure unnecessarily prolonged periods of heat with little or no information as to when the situation would change.
Businesses also had to endure the same treatment.If this information was given to the community of SA in a timely manner everyone could effectively risk manage their individual situation - this is called teamwork and transparency a process which Mr Rann doesnt understand.
I am sure that he and his team will do their best to hide everything in every area so they come out looking very clean in the pending announced enquiry.
If they truly have SA's interest at heart they will make this whole process transparent and open for discussion. My experience has always shown me that those wil something to hide always shy away from tranparency.
while I have work committments on wednesday and sadly can not be there for the forum at this late notice any future form/event I will ensure I am present.
If the government cant even advise the community of SA what suburbs they are contemplating turning off each day how can we trust them that their financial figures are correct and this road is the best path of our community.
I agree with Dr Gale and we need to listen to those with the necessary experience in their field to make informed decisions. Perhaps the government needs to do this across the board to ensure that SA is a better place after all I am sure there are many households who would have liked to have the information about proposed suburb outages in advance. I am sure their are many medico's who also would have liked to have this information in advanc so that they could give their patients appropriate and timely advise.
The government's stance defies common sense but on Friday after leaving my office after a power outage I felt alot better knowing that everything well be better soon - the Clipsal is nearly here and we will have a whole new raft of "good news Mike"
frustrated
Dear Dr Katsaros,
For the benefit of Minister Hill I am a political yes that’s right a swinging voter – I don’t do things for political reasons I do them for the best for SA. However in light of the predicted Weather forecast and the fact that there may be people of differing ages and health issues would it not be better to have the forum on the following week when it will possibly be cooler
A-Political swinging voter and supporter of the RAH
Today the 1/2/09, The Adelaide Sunday Mail published the third major article in three weeks about the RAH/Marj.
The Sunday Mail continues to be the voice of the people in South Australia.
In the same three weeks the Adelaide Advertiser has only published two comments on the issue. Both have been editorials supporting the government view.
Sadly the editorial staff of the Adelaide Advertiser have ceased to be the voice of the people.
Thank goodness for the ABC and other electronic media, the Sunday Mail and the Australian.
Anonymous
minister John Hill is partly right when he says that his government were elected to make decisions. Actually we elected them to hopefully make the correct decisions and the way to do that is to continue to listen to the people; not just once every four years. This state is in danger of becoming a one party administration and that breeds arrogance, as we are seeing on this issue. Minister Hill would be well advised to play the ball and debate the issues rather than play the man .
If we wish to purchase a kgm of meat, then we wouldnt go to a haberdashery shop. Then why does Mr Hill design a new Hospital, without asking the appropriate people? This is known as foreseeability-or for Mr. Hill, common sense! Speaking of Bypass,(Mr. Peter Malycha-above), I suggest that Mr Hill already has had one-yes a Carotido-Inferior Mesenteric Artey Bypass-Bilateraly! Goodness me, what next?
The Adelaide Advertiser has very close links to the Department of Health. They are basically their public relations arm. I agree that the Tiser no longer is in touch with the people of SA. I'm surprised that anyone still buys it.
How fortunate we are to have a group of DR'S willing to stand up and tell it how it really is. It would be sacrilege to change the name of the R.A.A. A referendum to decide the issues at hand would be the way to go if Rann can’t be perused to abolish his fool hardy plans. Hill needs a reminder again that the people of S.A employ him, election time is close gentleman listen to the people who put you in to your job.
Elizabeth former R.N
I had the privilege of making the acquaintance of the late Dr Wolfgang Wilde in Germany, back in the 1970s when we discovered a common interest in several areas of laboratory and clinical research. I was later to sponsor his immigration to Australia, where he worked not only in association with me but continued his research. Whilst he had problems in discovering where he could "buy a tube for my garden" (hosen are things you wear in Germany), he expressed his appreciation that in continuing his research, he could walk in minutes between the University library, the Medical School and the IMVS. Whereas, he said, in his clinic in Schwartwald, he needed to drive distances to three different cities to gain the same information. Please, Mr Hill, don't make it any harder for those of us who give part of our lives to research!
As for the proposed Marj; let it happen, not as a hospital but a centre of excellence to coordinate the diverse activities and campuses of the University of SA. give it a walkway to Memorial drive, and promote the established sport interests of Uni SA!
I am getting tired of this government denigrating those who dare to disagree with them.The above comments have come from a wide section of the community (voters, remember Mike Rann). In view of the hot weather forecast for Wednesday, the numbers attending the meeting may not be a true representation of the supporters of the RAH but rest assured,they are out there.
I'm glad that yesterday's article corrected a particularly egregious piece of drivel from John Hill. The Generational Health Review, which was conducted at considerable expense to the taxpayer, made absolutely no mention of building a new hospital in the city. John Hill's claim that the GHR recommended the Marj be built is entirely false. And there is a saying that if you have to lie to win your case, your case obviously doesn't have enough merit.
I am glad that a movement is underway to save the RAH. I agree with all that has been said. The Government, as usual, makes plans without consulting those people who are directly concerned, ie the medical professional and the people who are likely to be future patients. The RAH should be saved and upgraded. It is the most sensible and obvious solution, but that's too easy for politicians. I am fed up with this Government's domineering attitude, wrong decison have been made regarding Glenside - do not let it happen again. Good luck, I hope you are successful. GMM
the world economic news tonight is not good.So why would we want to put this state a further two thousand million dollars in debt for a hospital that all these doctors say we do not need?
Dear A-political swinging voter,
Thank you for your support which the RAH needs desparately. No one, however, should jeopardise their health on Wednesday(2nd Feb. 2.00-2.30pm, on hosp. side of Margaret Graham Bldg). We cannot wait for cooler weather because we must capitalize on the momentum that is building up as the people find their voice. You will have other opportunities to demonstrate your allegiance to the people's flagship hosp.
Many other more physically-able supporters will demonstrate
that they are prepared to endure much more than the hot weather to prevent the gravest error that will have ever been perpetrated by any S.A. govt. Hope to see as many people as possible on Wednesday.
Jim Katsaros
The problem Minister Hill has is that a decision has been made by the "Cabinet of Two" and now the Minister has to sell the idea as his own. You see, Cabinet is like a footy trip, "what goes on in cabinet, stays in cabinet".
The fact that the RAH needs to be urgently rebuilt to meet modern standards (and preferable futuristic standards as far as one can reasonable predict) is indisputable and as an employee and potential customer I DO NOT want to work or be treated in a building site, if plans are changed to rebuild on site.
The people of Adelaide should be proud of plans to rebuild a public hospital and should fight for continuation despite the global economic downturn. Does it really matter if it is a few kilometres down North Terrace if the site gives a beautiful building with easy access.
Name it the RAH and keep the tradition going if that is important to people but don't destroy a positive plan for progress.
What a Paradox, Mr. Hill. I suggest that Mr. Hill read The 2006 June edition of The RAH's "Vital Signs", wherein he's pictured everywhere opening New Departments, Equipment and saying how wonderful it all is! Then 2 yrs later, he wants to get rid of it? This is all consistent with the mentality of "the marj" concept. He simply doesn't know! See you all tomorrow at 2pm.
Nothing John Hill says will happen ever does. What happened to closing ICU, after hours surgery and the Renal Unit at the QEH? After all his fanfare about it, how many operations has Aspen Medical done (of course the answer is none)? Hill gets terrible advice from the cretins he has surrounded himself with. The Marj will go the same way as Hill's other great ideas.
We must save the R.A.H. Use the money on hospital instead of moving it. It is in a prime location where everyone can access it.
Thank you for finally giving us a voice and forum- all our opinions and signatures never seemed to interest anyone. I am RAH trained and have worked here for 12 years- it is a fabulous hospital and we have a real identity and pride to provide excellent care- in the past, present and future. We work here for the patients not for a premier's ego trip. Most critical areas are very new and the envy of our interstate collegues. Yes, some work needs to be done- perhaps it would have been sensible to ask the staff and patients. Unfortunately as opposed to us who are actually qualified in our medical fields, our government superiors are utterly incompetent and out of their depth (not that they have enough insight to acknowledge it). The amount of money they are willing to spend on the new hospital beggars belief. There are such vast areas of dire need in our health system- imagine how many psychiatric patients could be treated in a dignified fashion rather than "live" in public hospital EDs just as an example that comes to mind. The heat wave has shown how many vulnerable people are out there. But then health policy under the Rann government has never been about substance and deliberately excludes the experts eg us who actually treat real patients rather than waffle about virtual ones. Getting rid of the RAH- who would thought that anyone could come up with such A LUDICROUS idea! But then, we have all learned over the years, never to underestimate Messieurs Rann, Hill et al.- there are always more sad and silly ideas. We have to stand up. Save the RAH!
REMINDER TO ALL FRIENDS OF RAH of the mass rally tomorrow:WEDNESDAY 4th Feb
At 2-2.30 Infront of Margaret Graham building
At 7-7.30 Lecture Theatre Eleanor Harrald bldg,nxt to RAH library.
Support the Action Group.All staff and public welcome to attend.
We,the public, have heard from alot of senior doctors putting the case against "the Marg". We have read three excellent articles by Brad Crouch in the Sunday Mail giving both sides. We have heard virtually nothing from The Advertiser except a couple of poorly disguised pro-government editorials(until todays Letters). WhatI would like to see is the opinion of all those senior doctors whom the Gov. asked before taking this momentous decision.
Having been to the rally today, the only sensible thing I heard was to hold a public debate about building the new hospital versus rebuilding the RAH. For me, a critical point is that the RAH is a building which is being closed.... it's staff, it's culture, it's traditions, it's wealth of knowledge
and expertise.........everything the RAH is famous for is being relocated to what has the potential to be a fabulous new hospital......lets fight for getting the new hospital right and not throw the baby out with the bath water.
Just getting into my car, I hear the government advert., re; "the marj"-what on earth does "the renovating a house" have in common to the renovation of a hospital?? I suggest that it's symbolic of the irrational logic that has given rise to this manic, good idea at the time thinking re; "the marj" A house v an hospital? Anyway, what happened to The MFP-what was it?? Another good idea at the time job Being inter alia an aeroplane pilot, hell it's going to be not only noisy there, but difficult for sequencing & separation of aircraft/helicopters-obviously not thought about!
Congratulations to Dr Katsaros and everyone else who has become involved with this group.
It’s important for doctors and other health professionals to come forward and voice their opinion.
The Royal Adelaide Hospital is a great facility and should be kept for the benefit of all South Australians.
The Opposition has been campaigning for the retention of the Royal Adelaide Hospital since the Government’s announcement to bulldoze it.
Last year we lodged petitions in the Parliament and will continue to question and challenge the Government on every aspect of the ill-conceived Marj project.
Keep up the good work.
Vickie Chapman MP
I know this is pessimistic, but I am convinced that the ‘SA Govt.’ won't listen to the public. They haven’t in the past so why should they break with tradition on this occasion.
After saying that, I still wish to cast my vote against the proposed new MJN hospital. We should improve what we have and perfect that which we know, not fix that which isn’t broke. There is nothing wrong with our current WORLD RENOWN Royal Adelaide Hospital that some updated renovating won’t fix.
Mr Rann You couldn’t maintain the hospital building you have, why build a new building just so the government of South Australia can neglect that too and end up in the same predicament in short, ‘same shit, different location’.
My question Mr Premier is WHO is going to REALLY benefit from this the state, the people, the govt. or someone’s mate’s development investment company.
I strongly say 'NO' to the new hospital and request proof, to be publicly published, that there is urgent need otherwise.
I currently work at the RAH as a nurse and I think that RAH should be rebuilt. The RAH is old and it would be impossible to build it and make it like a new building. Take for example a ward in the north wing the wards are small there are bays of six, nurses stations are smam only two computers, there is no family rooms for pts who are dying. Just go look at the QEH the wards are big, only single or double rooms, nurses stations are big. Personally i think people should take a step back and ask them selves can the RAH really be upgraded and yet make it as functional as the QEH or flinders? Its would be impossible..
Given the GFC and the coming recession, building a new hospital is not the best use of funds. Refurbish the RAH. Another issue - why name the new one after a sportsperson who wasn't even born in SA?
Name it after an South Australian who had something to do with Medicine – Howard Florey!!!
What connection does a runner from NSW who won a couple of chintzy medals aeons ago have with medicine, other than being a patient with sports injuries?
Name a sportsmed clinic or a stadium after her if you must, but not a 1.6B$ white elephant hospital.
Good Lord - wasn't Mike (Go Panthers) Rann part of Labor's fumbling, bumbling team that nearly sent us broke after the State Bank debacle? Hasn't he learnt a thing? These guys really haven't a clue. Like Dr Katsaros said, can someone please tell us who recommended that a new hospital be built? And why was there no public consultation? This just doesn't sound right. And Rann thinks lawyers are bottom feeders...
To Vicki Chapman: keep on fighting this. It will be a genuine election issue
To Anonymous who posted at 0015, 5.2.
A personal and ill-informed attack on a truly great Australian who has done more for research into cancer than millions of other people is hardly warranted.
An apology to Mrs Nelson-Jackson would not be out of line.
Agreed. Let's just stick to the issue at hand and not resort to personal attacks. It demeans us as a group and does nothing to further our cause. Also it takes the focus away from the main point which is rebuilding versus new building on new site.
Marjorie Jackson-Nelson should ring up Mike Rann and ask that her name isn't used for the new hospital. She must realise that the people of SA don't want her the Marj.
i think the rah should be rebuilt from scratch but dont call it the marj.. keep the name.. not the building. although they could keep the old ones just nock down the pt wings
Yes I was there at the 2-2:30pm MargGraham Porch fronting the RAH where hearty people dressed in styles of blues with no political agenda gather to listen to White shirt speeches from the "Save the RAH" chairman Dr Katsaros and co.
With backing heat and limited shade people had to huddle closely together listening, occassionally raising their hands in overwhelming support for the 4 resolutions that publically where indorsed. (you can read them yourself at the top left of this webpage)
As I was on my way to work like many others I knew our mumbers could be greater and so respectfully request another "Save the Rah" gathering at 2-2:30 pm. Come to think of it in the future a 6-6:30am action of closing off Nth Terrace would be of the least inconvenience to traffic for 15 minutes, yet certainly attract media attention. Change of shift 8-8:30pm , 10-10:30pm???
150 Years! 24/7!!! CARE CARE CARE!
Revised plan redducing the 170,000 squ/m to 140,000 squ/m new hospital??? Micke Rann claiming the savings made by reducing the width of the CORRIDORS?? How stupid to think you can so easily change the corridors dimension and get away OH & S Safe hospital.???
Dear God of Rah please remove this states continuous affliction of Arrogant, stupid miss informed health ministers and give us one with our speech and our! T-Shirts, petitions and RESOLUTIONS!! Fanning their Transformation to see things from the CoalFace of Humanity and OUR Save The RAH!!!!!(((***WAY***)))
AL Ord
awol bk soon
Just heard news via Mr Foley, that SA is financially in strife-well.I continue congrats to Mr. Katsaros etal for this stand. Minister Hill claims that our argument is all about sentimentality-he obviously is not aware of that word's meaning-what a concern. The word is based on one's own experience! ie; in Court, one is considered an expert witness, if it's held by The Judge, that they hold all of those requirements that will bring about an acceptable opinion in Law. The latter was never consulted-ie; The Experts!-in this manic decision to build "the marj".Now this is confirmed as a financial disaster-just as James mentioned-The State Bank, The Remm-Myer Centre and The MFP-whatever that was.One doesn't need to be a mental giant to see the adverse results-eg, the purging of resources (beds) from other centres such as QEH, Modbury & the rural hospitals!!
I have extreme difficulty with the use of such excuses to justify a new hos[ital. They are all steeped heavily in such paucity, that it becomes fancible.eg; "..I always get lost trying to find a ward at The RAH..", " The carpets are dirty", "..the walls need painting" and that old chestnut, "my aunty died in their" Obviously we may safely assume that; at "the marj", no-one will die & no-one will get lost.Already, I hear the raucous laughter from those who actually have worked in major hospitals around the world.Mr Hill & Mr Foley, we are already in a recession, but Mr Hill's doctrine is: I giveth on one hand, but taketh (BEDS) on the other-quick to take BUT the giveth comes in the form of a Manic, Uninformed Promise-but at a deleterious cost in all ways to The Patients of SA.
On Thursday night, 5 Feb. 2009, we heard Good Doctor Katsaros greatly defend the RAH against a broadside from ABC local radio presenter Peter Goers. The RAH is not a major refuge for horrible hordes of dangerous bacteria any more than most other major hospitals. Please note this : the expected case-loads of the future are to rise because of the poor habits of the People of Adelaide and South Australia, such as drinking too much alcohol and smoking too many cigarettes (Peter Goers specialises in this). Add to this the terrible amount of disease due to deterioration of DNA in genetic health due to uranium and other heavy-metal mining, and we have a recipe for disaster that CAN ONLY BE BLAMED ON OURSELVES, for our own poor habits, and surrender to World economic (mining) policies. We ourselves must be responsible for the better part of our health, and stop relying so heavily on public-funded hospitals to cure our own self-caused diseases and conditions. Keep the RAH where it is, next to the beautiful Botanic Gardens, they are of great benefit and real therapeutic advantage to almost any patient. We must totally avoid any move of the main city hospital to a "cattle car" facility near the city railroad yards. Be of Good Health.
hi i khaled
I agree with all of the comments made but we need more than this. How about some public meetings so that the people can get together and show our opposition to this dumb idea!
The 1.7b estimated cost will blow out to more like 2billion because the site is contaminated and the clean up always costs much more.
Also, can we have some car stickers please? I know many people who would be pleased to put them on their cars.
Minister Hill: To birth the Marj now would be a big mistake. The RAH still has another 30 +++ years left in her... She's no where near over the Hill yet.
Herman Monster was here 2009 & says
Do not birth the Marj.
The Rann Government is attempting to Euthanize the RAH in order to give a premature birth to the Marj.
It seems inevitable that we will end up with MARJ as the mother of all hospitals. After all we are working for DOH run by the HOMER system.
I suggest we change the Childrens Hospital name to BART.
PS Unfortunately Womens Health Services aka Queen Victoria part of WCH were left off the redevelopment agenda completely, this appears to have been an oversight and all requests to revisit this have fallen on deaf ears.
I have been unable to find anyone who was consulted about the decision to move the RAH and rename Marjorie Jackson Nelson Hospital. We were just told that it would be done. The RAH has many facilities, e.g. Renal Unit, Burns Unit (world renowned) Medical School, etc.to name a few. Are these to be shifted too? What right has the government got to dictate what will happen without a referendum? Update, sure, but do not move this world class hospital.
Judy
We are both people who have worked at the RAH .MY wife did her training there and has worked at the RAH as well whilst I worked there in several capacities for many years and have recently retired. This Hospital can never be replaced by an 800 bed hotel type accomodation. Where is the teaching? the research? and cross fertilisation of ideas which comes from being closely aligned with 6 different organisations.The Dental Hospital, Hanson centre,IMVS, Medical School,University of Adelaide and the Joanna Briggs Institute. All of these fine bodies are either on RAH campus or not more than minutes away by walking . At any time on any day one can see visiting professionals from all of these bodies within the Hospital teaching or being taught. What is to happen to that cross flow of ideas which is so important to new discovery or thought.
Well done Jim Katsaros and co for having the courage speaking out on behalf of the "silent" majority of South Australians who oppose the move from the current RAH site.
What is this government thinking ????
How can they possibly justify this ??
The Marj was coughed up during the 2008 budget. I believe the Marj was first publicly spat from the Hon Kevin Foley's mouth as he delivered his 2008 mid year budget.
It was meant to "Impress" make Labor shine for 2010 & beyond. They did not perceive backlash to occur.
I wonder if all Labor MP's are for the Marj. I reckon some prefer to retain the RAH. It's forbidden for a Labor MP to go against a party decision else they would be looked down upon. I think Jane Lomax-Smith did once. It's a power struggle within a party. Can't think independently, controlled like a puppet on strings.
If the people in the electorate want something changed, bad luck, has to be approved via the party first.
Weird democracy hey.
It's not everyday a new hospital is on the cards, this is what any Minister for Health would dream for. Fortunately/unfortunately, Minister Hill's dream is becoming a nightmare. As Herman Monster said earlier, the RAH is not over the Hill yet.
Friends, no matter what, people power will prevail. After all, ordinary citizens control the main strings to these puppets. We are the puppeteers who have power to manipulate and we will manipulate skilfully.
See you puppeteers at the ballot box.
Why does the government keep using the figure of $1.7 billion for The Marj?
That's the figure used when the project was first announced in June 2007, almost two years ago.
We now know that it was a guess-timate and they had no idea what was going to go into the hospital.
The cost of medical equipment and construction costs have all jumped significantly in the last two years.
By any reasonable assessment the cost of The Marj would now be well over $2 billion.
So back to my original question of why they haven't updated the cost; because the savings between a re-build and a The Marj become even bigger.
But add to all this the exprbitant cost of private/public partnership finance in the current environment.
We'll be paying credit card rates of interest on more than $2 billion for thirty years, plus the high cost of private management by the winning consortium.
We are about to embark on the biggest expenditure commitment in the State's history and the government refuses to have it tested in an election.
The message in March 2010 needs to be clear and unequivocal. No, Mr Rann, No.
By the way, instead of pending our money on TV ads promoting your ideas, spend it on the hospitals we currently have.
All these advertisements appear to be an acute case of an urgent retrospectoscopy, in order to justify the delusional thinking by The Govt.,-all of which was done suddenly and by stealth. Me thinks that The Govt., are reviewing their manic ideology. It's called rapid rationalisation-all as an afterthought. Wonder whats next.
1. On Ch7, Villis Marshall stated that research would not be affected by the splitting of the current co-location of labs and hospital. This is nonsense. There are clinical studies where (a) recruitment of study participants requires going from lab to outpatient clinics as potential participants arrive for the first time of for repeat visits and without this ready access, recruitment would become non-existent, (b) blood samples for research must be processed fresh (this is different from pathology tests) and therefore need to be collected and taken to the lab immediately (c) surgical specimens for research must be collected fresh from theatres and taken to the lab and it would be widely recognised that noone can give a fixed time when a surgical specimen will be ready. Therefore one has to be onsite or nearby. For these activities to continue with the Marj at the West End, researchers would spend more time on North Terrace between sites than they would working.
2. Staff are not allowed to speak publicly on the Marj as this is part of our contract. That is accepted. However, why isn’t this applied universally? Dorothy Keefe has featured in a television ad and Villis Marshall has spoken publicly on radio and TV about the Marj. Therefore, the policy of restriction has been applied only to those who might disagree with the govt position, but has not been applied to those who agree with the govt position. This uneven application needs justification.
3. Details are needed re costing of the Marj. How was the $1.7 billion derived? My understanding is that the average international cost per m2 to build a hospital was taken and multiplied by the estimated size of the Marj. Is this correct and if so, what are the margins of error? These are likely to be large as we are told that this hospital will be like no other with regard to facilities and processes which in turn require equipment. Therefore, how could it be costed at the outset, especially if an international average hospital benchmark figure was used?
4. What is a public private partnership in practice and what will be the consequences for the public of SA? PPPs were used to build the tunnels in Sydney and seem to be an example of a failed model. My understanding is that public land will be provided at no cost to a developer (the private partner) who will fund the construction of the hospital at no apparent cost to the govt. However, what happens then? The govt will operate the hospital, but will we lease it permanently or we will then begin to buy it over many years? However the PPP is structured, the public certainly will not own the hospital at the outset.
Dear All,
I visit many people who are housebound. Recently a frail, elderly lady shared her complete exasperation over the 'Anti New Hospital League' as she called it. She described to me how she can't get to her specialist appointments at the RAH because it is 'too expensive and hard to get there.' She also hated that her dearest friend and neighbour was in tears when the neigbour had to admit that she was too frightened to drop her off at the RAH, due to previous bad experiences trying to drop people off with buses bearing down on her on North Tce. This meant that the neighbour was unable to take her into the RAH when her husband of 50 years was dying of cancer. The lady I visited thought that a nice modern hospital close to the railway station, with views looking out on the river, and designed with somewhere to drop-off/pick-up and park was a good idea. She thought that the staff working at the RAH who don't want a new facility must be 'short sighted, selfish and stupid.' Her words, not mine. When I gently introduced the idea that I am sure that everybody is doing their best, she absolutely agreed. She stated what a magnificent job all the RAH staff do in providing wonderful care.
I would like everybody to realise that if you only listen to voices which reinforce your own point of view, you will not get any sense of what the community really thinks.
When I looked at your points in favour of staying with the same site, it seems to me that the really important things such as patient care and links with research should be vastly more important than where exactly a building sits.
The 'we were not consulted' has gained an initial few weeks of press coverage, but now that your group has deliberately stepped into public domain, please expect much more rigorous scrutiny in future. I have read the Generational Health Review, and given that it was published in 2003, of course there is no mention of names or locations of sites. However every individual who has made that personal decision to join your Action Group should read it. Google it. I will make it easy for time stretched individuals by giving you the specific page numbers which absolutely, directly apply to the current situation:
P.30 - Consultation process - 320 written submissions, further 104 written comments; 60 consultation meetings.
P. 31 - Listing of papers by Australia's leading authors of health system reform.
P. 43 - The consequences of no change.
P. 125 - Capital and asset planning.
P. 215 - Key systemic reform enablers (IT; Capital assets; effective motivated workforce; partnerships and research.
P. 237 - 243 List of task groups consulted
P. 245 - 250 List of individual contributors
P. 251 - 256 Lit of organizational contributors (NB the RAH units are all listed from p. 255 - 256)
I would recommend that we should all very seriously think about the current serious erosion of credibility of RAH staff with the general public; and every citizen's responsibility to plan for the future
All the best, and although I keep hearing from people who are very, very angry about your bid to undermine plans to build a new facility (which of course is likely to attract COMMONWEALTH funding in the current climate), many vulnerable, coomunity based citizens at the same time really love, respect and admire the RAH staff. That won't change I hope.
One reason why the concept of the Marj is flawed is that it is the brain child of a government boffin who is apparently also responsible for the country health plan and the redevelopment of Glenside.
The Country health plan was an unmitigated disaster as admitted even by the Premier.
The glenside hospital redevelopment plan has just been gutted by the report of the Parliamentary Select Committee who gave 19 recomendations as to how it should be changed.
I suspect if any external review body with a credible membership was to look at the plans for the marj it would be seen to be ill conceived. while the government continue to take the advice of the boffin and the other faceless mandarins, they will continue to make these fundamental mistakes rather than admit to their mistakes and seek a better outcome.
Anonymous at 15.08
What a pile of unmitigated drivel your post is.
Visiting a single elderly person who doesn't like the location of the RAH hardly constitutes a representative sample of the population's feelings. And your attempt to dress this up by saying how often you hear from people who are "very, very angry about the bid to undermine a new facility" is a pitiful cry for your voice to be taken more seriously than it deserves. These people can speak for themselves and they are VERY, VERY QUIET at the moment.
The GHR, which I have read, doesn't support a new hospital and the Government has ignored most of it anyway, because it was basically a rubbishy rehash of policies which have failed in other states and countries. There was NO CONSULTATION ABOUT THE NEW HOSPITAL. No amount of spin can cover that up.
The public will make up their own mind about whether the actions of the RAH clinicians is appropriate and about 80% agree at the moment. That means that the public is gaining respect for the RAH clinicians for standing up for their institution, the people who need it and the people of SA in general.
Question? Is this government boffin who is possibly responsible for the planning behind Glenside, country health plan and the Marj, the same Government boffin whose background is in the recycling industry?
In view of the fact that the decision on the new hospital was made before the current world financial crisis, I believe the state government can be considered "negligent" if they proceed with the proposed new hospital. My meaning is that they have a duty to the people of SA for competent use of the public purse and to proceed with the new hospital in light of this current financial crisis is derelict action.
Barney Flinstone (Foley) made it quite clear in his recent media announcements that we are in a major financial black hole and will be for many years, so why is the government not seeing the writing on the wall and adopting a risk avoidance strategy such as Plan B and re-develop the RAH and let entities in the health system share equitable $$$$.
As a recently retired healthcare worker and former staffer of the RAH, I am happy to support the case for upgrading the hospital.
I congratulate all concerned on the efforts to convince the government that they are on the way to political suicide.
I have worked in private and public hospitals under refurbishment and while its a pain for all concerned, the outcome makes up for it.
Keep up the protest.
I will start preparing my banner for the march.
I am in total support of saving our community hospital the RAH. As a health science student I see the RAH as an iconic institution with a first class global reputation that serves our populations health needs in many ways. It is in a prime location both for access (client and university student) and for ambience. I have on several occasions taken clients for outings into the surrounding botanical gardens to boost their psychological health to aid in therapeutic healing.
Think how much more could be achieved for the entire health system with the lower construction costs if the RAH was upgraded to a world class standard while functioning normally. The old wings could be worked on one at a time for the least disruption.
BUT please don’t forget the parking.
As for the name change, I am ashamed that our government gives precedence towards the names of old sporting identities over an eminent and established name as the RAH. If Marj Jackson had any gumption she would refuse the use of her name or nominate to have only a wing named after her if her ego so needs. Medical centres should be named after medical specialists at the very least.
I would be happy to march in protest over this ridiculous proposal in unity with all like minded “Adelaidiens” and I demand my democratic right to vote on this issue in a referendum.
I am also very angry at the total waste of our tax money on TV ads promoting your egocentric ideas, spend it on the hospitals we presently have.
Mike Rann your arrogance is astounding!!!
SAVE THE RAH!
I agree with the comments above. I do not want to see 150 years and the RAH's excellent name and reputation thrown away, I trained at the RAH.I do not want a Marj I want to keep the RAH and save money. Someone's ego decided that we needed a new hospital and the same ego decided that it would be called "The Marjorie Jackson Nelson Hospital"? It seems someone's ego has stepped in and taken over, maybe a politician who wants to leave a legacy that he can put his name to,to make himself feel important, without any regard for what the people want. Lets have a vote on this!!!!!!! Thankyou for stepping out to protest.
Why weren't the people of South Australia asked?
why is this Gov. spending 2bill on a hospital that we do not need and at the same time selling the forest income in the southeast for the next 100 years?
Once again Health Minister John Hill has stated his reasons for building a new hospital without answering any of the concerns put forward by those who want to re-build the RAH.
1. The probable blowout in the guestimate of
$1.7billion.
2. The public opposition to the name of the
MJN.
3. The distance the proposed site is from the
companion services. (We are "naive" for
questioning how this would impact.)
4. The huge debt this would incur which would
drain money from other hospitals and
health services.
5. The lack of consultation and unwillingness
to have open and honest discussion.
This government must know it has the job ahead of them to sell this idea to the public, hence the advertising on prime time television at our expense! Not happy John!
Quite right Marion. The Government only has to convince the 88% of the voters who do not agree with them! Should be a relatively simple matter for Media Mike.
I have just finished receiving emails from totally independant Architects, both locally and interstate-the latter amounting to 8. All of them have clearly indicated their prefence for renovation of the present RAH. Taking into consideration the fact that The RAH once had 1200 beds, it is the preponderance of opinion by the Architects, that it is just not cost effective to design & build a new hospital. I just wish that the Government would take advice from the experts. I ask all, to speak/write to their MPs. This battle is far from being over.Don't be complacent! Please!! Don't Stop.
P.S. Re; above. All agreed that, there is absolutely no comparison between the renovation of a house, to that of a Hospital of Recognition with all of its facilities. All agreed, that this analogy clearly demonstrates ignorance.
Thank goodness someone has the good sense to oppose a new hospital in favour of upgrading the RAH.
Do we have a democracy or a dictatorship in this state? Let's hope we can vote this lot out before the hospital starts, maybe the next lot will listen to the people!
I have much affection for the RAH as both my grandmother and mother were looked after by the caring doctors and staff of the RAH.
Even the recent upgrades to the RAH emergency department do not seem to have been enlarged enough to cope with more patients,one has to wonder if even these improvements were made in consultation with the people who have to work there, and any consideration given to additional health problems with an aging population, and an expanding population.
Any money saved in rebuilding at the RAH could be put to good use employing more staff and updating equipment.
A very interesting article was printed in the paper about someone who had done a study some years ago about a suitable location for a new hospital, and wrote to say that the proposed location of the new hospital was unsuitable. Unfortunately I cannot remember when this article was written.
On tonights news(ABC), we hear that the Marion Aquatic Center will now be underwritten by the SA taxayer because the PPP has fallen over and as the Premier quite rightly said, we need to do this "to make it happen". Unfortunately, the Marj is also going to be a PPP! I can feel another State Bank coming on. Oh and by the way, the Marion Pool costs have blowen out.
If it is cheaper to demolish and rebuild rather than to renovate something the size of the RAH so one can have ensuite facillities, then why was the Hotel Australia(Oberoi) renovated when down by private enterprise? Seems to suport the position put by Leigh Willis.
I would give anything to fly Messrs. Rann, Foley & Hill, to Royal Prince Alfred Hospital in Sydney, to show them how it's done-I should know, because I was involved.
Has anyone thought of collecting signatures for an open letter to Marjorie Jackson-Nelson asking her to reconsider her willingness to have her name used for the new hospital? She must know that 88% of South Australians don't want a name change.
We see in todays tiser that the Gov. is rolling out its flunkies to support the Marg.
One of these functionaries thinks that any hospital over 40 years old is not up to parr!
This would mean the the RAH has not been fuctioning for 110 years, clearly an absurd position.
This Gov. spokesman would also have us believe that a majority of our hospital need to be mothballed.
It means that Flinders Medical Center is 5 years away from obsolesence.
When are these people going to stop insulting our intelligence?
If the above is true, the WCH should also be replaced if a hospital isn't up to scratch after 40 years. So why isn't the WCH moving into the Marj. It's just more lies and spin from a Government which thinks we're all stupid enough to believe anything they say.
I do not disagree with the need to upgrade. My generation will not put up with shared bathrooms and will not put up with shared rooms. Things do have to change in some respects.
However I do disagree with putting the MARJ on that silly defined (no room for expansion) site facing the Torrens. It is wrong in many respects. The traffic into and out of any hospital is horrendous. Even Flinders Private (with all the extra room it has around it) has very poorly worked out access for vans, ambulances and all manner of delivery vehicles. Not to mention the poor clients and family members and taxi vehicles and ambulances trying to get entry and trying to exit the site. You can bet the MARJ will be even worse. A nightmare. Yet at the MARJ , as proposed, - there are even less access points into and out of the MARJ than even the RAH.
Let us think laterally.
By the mid 21st century SA may need a new hospital (AGAIN) and by that time the MARJ will have well and truly outgrown that silly site chosen by Mr Rann.
Think laterally now.
The Marj site as chosen will never be anything more than a CLINIC site. It is so pathetic that so called "professionals" would even dare to recommend it or advise that site. Mr Rann is more than foolish to not spot the errors inherent in that silly site. Silly for a HOSPITAL. Much more suitable for other uses.
There is a better site.
Secure it now for a HOSPITAL.
The KESWICK barracks would be wonderful for a new major HOSPTIAL. Close to the city. multiple access points off Anzac highway for trucks - linen, laundry, Gribble, rubbish, waste, deliveries of all kinds. The site chosen for the hospital should be superior to the RAH not inferior.
The Rann site for the MARJ (stupid name) is vastly inferior than is the RAH.
Stop this madness now and think laterally and think of the future. The Marj is wrong and the site is wrong.
And while Mr Rann is throwing his money around - he needs to retain GLENSIDE. Pity the poor people afflicted - but they need help and they also need more than one 24 hour DEDICATED EMERGENCY area where they can be treated as public patients. I was shocked at how rude the staff in Emergency at RAH were to this particular group of clients. But the staff at RAH are under extreme stress from under-resourcing.
Right now I think Mr Rann is starving the emergency area of funds at RAH. It is under staffed and under resourced. Which makes the staff stressed. As a result I found the front office staff rude. It is not their fault. It may also be RAH management doing the bidding of Mr Rann. But it is not OK.
Whereas Flinders Emergency is much smoother and more pleasant. I think Mr Rann is intentional in wanting the demise of the RAH.
And Mr Rann also needs to recognize his stupidity, before it is too late for SA.
Please folk, don't let this Government (who lack the experience), fool the people. It's far too obvious. They need to listen to the experienced ones who do do know! The noise we make, I suggest reminds me of the now half century deceased British Priest, who stated " A loud noise at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other". Please continue with the debate!
The Keswick Barracks and the Clipsal factory are both much better sites than the trainyards for a new hospital. Who did John Hill ask because he certainly didn't ask any city planners or engineers? What are the credentials of the people who made this appalling decision?
How arrogant is this government? The wish to build a new hospital and give it a new name, and on that land that is not suitable is just an intended vote winner for a desperate government. Along with the swimming centre on a site that is too small and is also completely illogical as a site for a swimming centre. When will Marjorie Jackson Nelson disassociate herself from this plan. Her image is tarnished by being associated with this plan. She has a road named after her. How much else has to be named after her. It may make the government feel good. But is not what the people of South Australia want.
I do not see this government allowing enough for car parking at the MJN. And who wants a huge car park on that park lands site anyway. But it needs car parking. Which is why the North Terrace puny little site is never going to cut it with the public.
And now I hear that the costings are at 2007 levels. So now it will cost even more to build it. And the government has announced it will be even smaller than they said at first. Bad move Mr Hill. Bad position. Admit it Mr Hill. The Marjory Jackson Nelson is a dumb decision.
" Health Minister John Hill today confirmed the hospital building, that was originally going to be 170,000 square metres, had been revised down to about 150,000 or 155,000sq m.
However, Australian Medical Association state president Dr Peter Ford told ABC radio he had been made aware the size had decreased to 140,000sq m. "
Mr Rann you have some responsibility to get the following right first:
WATER - essential. That costs money. And water is non negotiable.
Yatala- terrible place and needs relocating. More money.
Power - the next heat wave will kill more pensioners trapped in their hot box homes. provide the power SA needs. More money.
Do not sell off Cheltenham. Not one metre of it. It is essential for storing water. Yes it will cost SA money to do the right thing.
Need i go on Mr Rann. SA cannot afford the hospital you want to build on North Terrace when there is a perfectly good one up the road that just needs some upgrading.
Today hospitals are not just about reception, a couple of consulting rooms and a few store rooms and offices for the nurses plus the rooms for the patients.
Today hospitals also have to accommodate a huge number of mini clinics for doctors in private practice. Even the Royal Adelaide has many of these mini clinics. That means more waiting rooms, more amenities to meet the needs of those clinics and more offices and consulting areas for the Doctors. Then there are the big areas for scans, xrays and all the other equipment. And all that even without a single hospital room for a patient.
Then there is all the parking for the doctors cars. And for safety all the parking for the nurses cars.
Plus all the area for big trucks to turn and ambulances to line up. It pains me to think that they are surrounding themselves with yes men and yes women. there can be no other explanation for their group think poor decision making on this hospital choice.
Please someone talk some sense into Mr Rann, Fole and Hill. They must be living in a fairy wonderland of make believe if they think this land they have chosen on North Terrace over the top of railway lines will ever be suitable.
The Royal Adelaide Hospital precinct is invaluable and unique.It is the envy of many hospitals around the world to have around it a Medical and Dental School,Hanson Cancer Research,IMVS, School of Pharmacy.Podiatry and Physiotherapy as well as University of Adelaide and USA.
The medicos,scientistes researchers as well as students appreciate and understand the importance of this outstanding precinct.
The Jewel in the Crown is of course RAH.Take this away and the precinct loses its relevance.
Unfortunately Mr Hill is neither a doctor nor a scientist and he has bee ill-advised by his supposed `advisers`
The case to rebuilt RAH is compelling just from this point of view alone!!
Everything that can be done with the proposed MJN can be done with RAH. Where there is a will there is a way.The genius of 21stcentury engineers and architects cannot be underestimated.
And I do not believe it will take 15 yrs. This is only scaremongering.The rebulding will be in stages without sig. disruption to the public as has been occuring the past 10 yrs.
This government does not seem to have understood the implications of bad decisions made - such as building a big building on park lands. That is never a vote winner. Remember the wine center? The one on public land? Remember the furore? Remember that Mr Rann? History can repeat Mr Rann if you are so certain you cannot lose by hitching your star to the Marorie jackson nelson hospital. Your albatross?
One of the big advantages of the present RAH site is it's proximity to the Botanic Gardens.This is so valuable to patients and visitors, also staff. The promise of the government to return this space to parklands if the RAH is razed, should be viewed with suspicion. The temptation to sell off all or even part of this valuable asset would be too great for a cash-strapped government. If anyone believes otherwise.....tell 'em they're dreaming!!
Post a Comment