News

Select a news topic from the list below, then select a news article to read.

Rudd - Historic health agreement signed

The Prime Minister and Victorian Premier today signed a historic agreement to
deliver a National Health and Hospitals Network.

The National Health and Hospitals Network will improve health outcomes for
the people of Victoria and the sustainability of the Victorian health and
hospitals system.

This agreement delivers the most significant reform to our health and
hospitals system since the introduction of Medicare.

The National Health and Hospitals Network will deliver a dominant funder, so
that patients in Victoria are no longer shunted from one system funded by the
State Government to another funded by the Australian Government.

Under this reform, the Australian Government will:

- become the dominant funder of public hospitals, funding 60 per cent of the
nationally efficient price of every public hospital service provided to
public patients
- fund 60 per cent of building, equipment, teaching, training and services;
- fund all GP and primary care services and all aged care services.
This new National Health and Hospitals Network also means that hard working
doctors and nurses will have more say in the way their local hospital is run,
through Local Hospital Networks and new primary health care organisations.

From July 1 this year, the Australian Government will start delivering $1.5
billion in additional funding for Victoria over the next four years, this
will provide:

- $402 million for 326 new sub-acute hospital beds
- A four hour target on emergency department waiting times, backed by a $181
million investment in additional capital and recurrent funding
- A target of 95 per cent of people receiving elective surgery within
clinically recommended times, backed by a $194 million investment in
additional capital and recurrent funding.
- $112 million to provide coordinated care for around 65,000 patients with
diabetes
- $128 million to support more aged care places and improved access to GP and
primary health care services in aged care
- $278 million to train more doctors and allied health professionals and to
support the nursing workforce in Victoria.
- $37 million for youth friendly mental health services and more mental
health nurses

The Australian Government will also deliver a minimum of $3.8 billion in
top-up funds between 2014-15 and 2019-20, to guarantee sustainable funding
for Victoria's health and hospital system.

Today's agreement delivers fundamental reform to ensure that the Victorian
health and hospitals system can cope with the pressures of a growing and
ageing population.

It will deliver a nationally funded and locally controlled health system that
will ensure that future generations of Australians enjoy access to
universally accessible health care.


------------------------------

--------------------------------------
Transcript URL: http://www.pm.gov.au/node/6792
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 29 May 2010
News Type: Interview
Title: Transcript of joint doorstop interview
--------------------------------------------------------------------

PM: Well this is good day for health and hospitals in Australia, health and
hospitals in Victoria. This is an historic agreement between the Australian
Government and the State Governments and Territory Governments of Australia,
between the Australian Government and the Government of Victoria. It's about
one core principle with is putting patients first, one core principle which
is better health and better hospitals for all Australians and all Victorians.

I'd like to thank the Victorian Premier for being such a constructive
participant in what has been a difficult debate for the nation, bringing
about fundamental reform for the health and hospital system. This is the
biggest reform for the health and hospital system that Australia has seen
since the introduction of Medicare. Its core elements are these: firstly that
we are, as the Australian Government, becoming the dominant funder for the
public hospital system of Australia for the first time. Its capital costs,
its recurrent costs as well as its teaching costs, training costs and
research costs. And the Australian Government is becoming the exclusive
funder of the primary health care, the exclusive funder for the aged care
network as well. These are big and fundamental reforms.

Secondly, for states like Victoria, what it now means is that over the next
three to four years we'll investing something like an additional $1.5 billion
to enhance the number of hospital beds, enhance the elective surgery
performance within Victoria, enhance also accident and emergency services in
Victoria, as well as increase the supply of doctors and nurses in Victoria as
well.

This is where the rubber hits the road in a very practical way. I'm advised
that for example that $1.5 billion will result in some 300 plus sub-acute
additional hospital beds across the state of Victoria. For elective surgery,
making sure that we bring about over time our four hour target by investing
something like an additional $180 million in Victoria, that's for accident
and emergency. For elective surgery, to make sure that we have 95% of our
elective surgery procedures completed within clinically acceptable times,
investing in Victoria something like a further $180-$190 million, and also a
further large investment to enhance the size of the local health and hospital
workforce; more doctors, more nurses. For the longer term it also means an
additional investment of the Australian Government helping with Victoria with
at least a further investment of some $3.5-$3.8 billion for the outer years.

So this overall, is a good reform for Australia, it's a good reform for
Victoria, it is a good injection from the Commonwealth into the needs of the
public hospital system here in Victoria. And I conclude where I began, this
is an historic agreement, an historic reform, it is all about putting
patients first, better health and better hospitals for all Victorians, for
all Australians, and I thank the Victorian Government and Premier John Brumby
for his agreement to this important national reform. Over to you you John.

BRUMBY: Terrific. Thank you very much to the Prime Minister, and to Tony
Lupton and the Andrew Way and can I welcome the Prime Minster here at the
Alfred today. We are very, very proud of the Alfred Hospital and the great
work here that's performed by the doctors and nurses and support staff, but
we've been particularly pleased this morning to show the Prime Minister our
elective surgery centre, and when we were having the discussions at COAG
which led to this historic agreement, one of the things that I talked about
there was the extraordinary difference that investment in centres like this
can make.

And what we've seen here at this centre, which cost something like $90
million for stage one opened in 2007, is much, much higher rates of
throughput, better patient outcomes and cancellation rates which have dropped
from eight to ten per cent down to one to two per cent. And all of that
reinforces what the Prime Minister has talked about today, and that is that
all of the things that we're doing in health, and the reform agreement that
we're signing today, is all about putting patients first. And as the Prime
Minister said, when we went up to COAG to the COAG agreement, there was a
pretty vigorous debate across the community about health care, and there
should've been a vigorous debate because we spend more money on health in our
budget than any other single item of spending. And as the Prime Minister has
said the changes that we've agreed on have been the biggest changes to our
health system since Medibank as it was then in the 1970s.

And so we needed to have that debate with the community and between
Governments to make sure we've got the policies right, and we're signing this
document today, it is an historic document. It means significant reform to
our health system, it means better outcomes for patients, it means more
elective surgery, it means quicker treatment times in emergency departments.
And as the Prime Minister has said it also means, for Victoria, 332
additional sub-acute beds.

So when we went through that debate, we've ended up with and agreement which
I think is a great agreement for our state. As the Prime Minister said over
the next four years there will be, in round terms, about $1.5 billion extra
coming to our state. $900 million of that will flow directly through our
hospital system. And it will mean 150,000 EDs treated quicker, it will mean
an extra 34,000 elective surgery treatments and as I've said, it will mean
332 additional sub-acute beds. And of course as part of that too there's
something like $700 million for primary care, for aged care, for preventative
care, all of the things that support our hospital system, and make our health
system truly comprehensive- offering the best possible care.

In terms of the post 2013-14 arrangements, as you know these are a matter of
debate too between Governments, again we've achieved I think an excellent
outcome for Australia and for Victoria. And in our case we now have secured,
locked-in and guaranteed something like $3.8 billion of additional funding
between 2013-14 and 2019-20. So this is an historic agreement. This is a
great agreement. This is the biggest single step forward in healthcare that
our state has ever seen. And we recently produced our State Budget as you
know, and many people described it as two health budgets in one, and it was
two health budgets in one, because it contained all of the additional
spending that we're providing as a State Government, plus of course the
significant increases in spending that the Prime Minister has provided.

And so in total, with the Prime Minister's funding and our own purpose
funding, we've been able to commit $4 billion extra of funding in Victoria to
put patients first over the next four years and that's by far the biggest
single additional injection that we've ever seen in health. So it will make a
difference to patients, whether they're here at the Alfred, whether they're
at the Austin, whether they're in Bendigo or whether they're in Ballarat, and
we couldn't have done all of this and committed all of these funds, without
the significant, the very significant, additional support that we got from
the Prime Minister. And for that, Prime Minister, we thank you.

PM: Just before taking your questions, where the rubber hits the road here is
from 1 July. That's when our additional funding for Victoria starts. So we
reached an agreement back in April, and here we are looking at 1 July for
additional funds to flow, additional funds for those additional sub-acute
beds, additional funds for accident and emergency, additional funds also for
elective surgery and in other areas of investment in the healthcare system.
So the bottom line is, making the changes happen on the ground, and that's
where this partnership is so important. Over to you folks.

JOURNALIST: Prime Minister twelve months down the track, what will, what
material changes or differences will patients see in treatment and their
waiting times?

PM: I think one of the great things about being here at the Alfred today is
to look precisely at what's been achieved in this great institution in terms
of the throughput of elective surgery cases. Here, through the investments
already made by the Victorian Government, you can see that their throughput
has increased by some 60 per cent, it means less cancellations for elective
surgery procedures.

So what does this mean in practical terms? That additional investment, from
memory about $180 million ourselves with the Victorian Government on
enhancing elective surgery procedures across Victoria, means that you will
see those elective surgery waiting times comes down. That's what it's all
about. That's very practical. So the very practical bits are less
cancellations for elective surgery, more predictability for elective surgery,
meaning that you can get it done quicker and get through and get out and get
home. The second thing is, accident and emergency, additional investments
there to increase the throughput of the A and E departments of the Victorian
and Australian hospital system, so that your presentation time and wait will
be reduced over time as well.

These are big changes together with the addition to sub-acute hospital beds.

Over to you folks.

JOURNALIST: Prime Minister there's a report in the paper today that, ah,
funding (inaudible) mining campaigns. You once said that such campaigns were
a cancer on democracy, can you tell us what the difference is here is?

PM: Well what I've said before is that all such public information campaigns
should go through the relevant approval processes, that's the first point.
And the second is this, I mean the Government from time to time, over the
last two years or so, has engaged in various forms of public advertising on
matters of public, the public interest and the national interest. Also, in
the Budget papers, we were very explicit on what would be expended on
individual campaigns, and these also go to national interest or public
interest matters. Specifically on this one, let me just underline one point.
We're on about a very big change to the Australian taxation system. When
you've got, therefore, multinational companies, many big ones, lining up to
fund a very big scare campaign against big tax reforms- which could damage
the economy, damage economic confidence, and therefore hurt working families,
the Government has a responsibility to put the facts on the table. That's
what we're doing.

JOURNALIST: You described such advertising campaigns back in 2007 as a 'thick
cancer', and something which you would like to diminish. Has your position
changed?

PM: Can I say that if you were to put together the quantum of Howard
Government advertising in any period of time against what this Government has
identified publicly in the Budget papers several weeks ago as its intention
to advertise in this area and a couple of other areas, this is chalk and
cheese. Furthermore, when it comes to our responsibilities for the economy,
economic confidence, the economy at large, and protecting it from damage- and
to make sure that working families are not hurt through scare campaigns
funded by very large-scale contributions from various multinational
companies, we've got a responsibility to act. A responsibility to look after
working families. We've got a responsibility to look after the overall
interests of the economy. We have a responsibility to make sure the facts are
out there, and not simply subjected to a scare campaign funded by some very,
very big vested interests.

JOURNALIST: Have you seen the Opposition's latest campaign (inaudible)

PM: No, I haven't. And the bottom line is this. When this Government faces
the Australian people, we will be saying there is a very clear choice on
keeping our Australian economy strong, and secondly, making sure that we're
delivering fundamental reforms to the health and hospital system of
Australia. We alone are committed to the actions necessary to keep our
economy strong. Mr Abbott has said he'd happily pull the rug over stimulus-
the rug from under stimulus in the economy. On these national health and
hospital reforms, we stand committed to their implementation from 1 July, Mr
Abbott stands opposed. The other thing I'd say is that on health and
hospitals, we have a massive investment in expanding the public hospitals of
Australia. Mr Abbott when he was Health Minister ripped $1 billion out of the
system, and now has said he'd rip almost another $1 billion out of the
system. That's the basic contrast.

JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, on the mining tax, are you concerned you're
losing ground in WA over that?

PM: This will be a tough debate, because we're prosecuting it in the national
economic interest. The tax reforms that we are committed to as a Government
is to deliver big changes to the company tax rate right across Australia. Tax
cuts for small business. Better super for working families. On top of funding
infrastructure for our economy's long term needs. Here in Victoria, the
Premier and I have often discussed the infrastructure needs of this great
state. These are huge needs. Therefore, the question we've got to face as an
Australian Government is how do we fund the infrastructure needs of the
nation long term. That's our reform plan. It's going to be a tough fight.
It's going to be a difficult debate. But we intend to bring about fundamental
tax reform.

It is of no surprise whatsoever when you have those who have made huge
profits in recent times that they will complain about paying more tax. I'll
leave one figure with you. Ten years ago, for every three dollars in profits
to the mining companies, one dollar was returned to the taxpayer through
royalties. Ten years later, seven dollars in profit to the mining companies,
still returning only one dollar to the taxpayers through royalties. The
Australian people actually want a fairer share of the resources which they
themselves ultimately own.

JOURNALIST: What do you make of assertions that the whaling issue has been
brought up as a diversion?

PM: The action that we have taken on that matter is consistent entirely with
our pre-election commitment. We said that we would- one, use diplomatic
action to try and bring about a cessation. That action, that diplomatic work
has not succeeded, although diplomatic negotiations continue. Secondly, we've
always said that in the event that that wasn't going to produce the results,
we would therefore undertake international legal action. This is honouring
our pre-election commitment. Furthermore, we're very mindful of the fact that
we have significant conferences of the International Whaling Commission
coming up. It's very important for Australia's position to be crystal clear,
and those conferences are only a matter of a week or two away. That's why
we've done it, and we've done it based on a decision of the Australian
Cabinet.

JOURNALIST: Premier, can I direct a question to you regarding a story in The
Age this morning linking the Facebook of this young girl who's been involved
with St Kilda players. Apparently that has ended up on some computers within
Government departments, including the TAC.

BRUMBY: I'm not aware of that. I obviously saw the article this morning, and
I think any transmission, circulation of that I think would be inappropriate.
And the TAC or any other agency should take steps to ensure that that doesn't
occur. I would make a more general point I think about Facebook, and I think
it's- there's other story in the media today for example about cyber
bullying, and the steps that we're taking there in schools. Facebook can be a
wonderful tool, a wonderful window to the world. But individuals, and
particularly young people, do need to be careful and think about the images
that are presented there, because they can be circulated, they can be
circulated to the world. And we're seeing in schools, too, the steps we've
announced with cyber bullying.

These are new steps to put in place new arrangements and new rules within
schools to try and protect children. We're doing work, too, with the Alannah
and Madeline Foundation- I believe the Federal Government also- we're jointly
funding a project there to try and eradicate cyber bullying in schools. But
look, the action in terms of circulating that, inappropriate, and Departments
need to stop that. But I think there's a broader issue there about Facebook,
and that is that we all need to be sort of mindful about the way in which
it's used and mindful of what some of the consequences can be.

JOURNALIST: The email that is circulating has former AFL footballers has
(inaudible) if not the wider AFL community?

BRUMBY: Again, I haven't seen it. I don't know if you can say that. But I
think it's unfortunate that it's been circulated, and I think I've made my
comments clear in relation to any Government agencies that have circulated
that.

JOURNALIST: Just on the resources advertising again, do you concede that
you've broken your own (inaudible)

PM: We've been absolutely consistent. Well, first of all, the Government has
funded a number of public information campaigns over a long period of time.
That's the first thing. Secondly, we have guidelines which governed that, and
those guidelines also contain within them provisions for advertising in
compelling circumstances. Thirdly, what are the compelling circumstances
here- if you face the prospect of a large-scale scare campaign from well
funded, multinational companies about tax reform, we as a Government have a
responsibility to act in defence of the economy, economic confidence, and to
protect working families' interests from being hurt. Can I add one further
thing as I go. And that is, just to echo what the Premier just said about
cyber bullying.

He's absolutely right. This is an increasing scourge on our modern Australia.
We have real problems here. You speak to mums and dads- and the Premier and I
do, regularly- this is a major problem which we have to wrestle with. It's
not making the headlines a whole lot, but frankly, below the radar, it's
something that mums and dads are becoming increasingly concerned about, right
across the country. Little kids being affected. Older kids being affected.
Kids that we all know being affected. And this is going to require some fresh
approaches from us all. Together we are backing the foundation the Premier
referred to before, the Alannah and Madeline Foundation. We've both been in
Melbourne here supporting its operation. But there is much more work for us
all to do, because this is a concern for all families.

Folks, I've got to zip, because I've got to be elsewhere.

Houston Podiatrist and His Unlicensed Podiatrist Co-Defendant Sentenced to Prison for Health Care Fraud

Franklin Beltre D.P.M., 40, of Houston, and a co-defendant have been sentenced to prison for committing more than $1 million in Health Care Fraud for submitting false and fraudulent claims to both the Medicare and Medicaid health care programs, United States Attorney José Angel Moreno and Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott announced today.

Beltre was sentenced today to 36 months’ incarceration by United States District Judge Randy Crane to be followed by a three-year-term of supervised release. In addition to the prison term, Beltre was ordered to pay $691,128.04 in restitution, which represents the amount he was paid for the false and fraudulent claims he had submitted to both Medicare and Medicaid. Indicted in September 2009, Beltre pleaded guilty on Jan. 27, 2010, to health care fraud.

At the time of his guilty plea, Beltre admitted to defrauding two health care benefit programs, specifically Medicaid and Medicare, by means of false and fraudulent claims in connection with the use of unqualified, unlicensed medical personal and for billing for medical services not rendered as described in count six of indictment. From April 29, 2006, through May 6, 2006, while vacationing in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., Beltre submitted claims to both Medicare and Medicaid for podiatric services he never performed and that were actually performed by co-defendant Manuela Alana, an unlicensed, unsupervised podiatrist and resident of Pharr, Texas. Judge Crane also sentenced Alana today. She will be serving a 24-month term of incarceration to be followed by a three-year-term of supervised release.

Beltre has been ordered to surrender to the United States Marshals Service (USMS) on June 14, 2010, in Houston to begin serving his sentence. Alana must surrender on June 21, 2010, to the USMS in McAllen to begin serving her sentence.

The investigation leading to the charges in this case was conducted by the Department of Health and Human Services-Office of Inspector General, the FBI and the Texas Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit. Assistant United States Attorney Carolyn Ferko prosecuted the case.

Pathology services confirmed for new Queensland Children's Hospital

A Queensland Government-owned and operated pathology laboratory will provide vital pathology services on site at the new Queensland Children's Hospital when it opens at South Brisbane in 2014.

Premier Anna Bligh said the laboratory will be located in the Queensland Children's Hospital academic and research facility, next to the new hospital.

"The Queensland Children's Hospital pathology laboratory will be a state-of-the-art facility, equipped with the latest technology to serve the hospital when it opens in 2014," she said.

The staff and services of the Mater Children's Hospital and Royal Children's Hospital will be merged under one roof at the Queensland Children's Hospital in 2014.

Both hospitals are working together to design and plan a new hospital for children, young people and their families.

"The Queensland Children's Hospital will be a hospital not just for today, but to meet the health care needs of Queensland children and young people into the future," Ms Bligh said.

Deputy Premier and Minister for Health Paul Lucas said Queensland Health staff would manage and operate the laboratory, which was expected to process more than 298,000 tests a year.

Children's Health Services chief executive officer Dr Peter Steer said deciding on the pathology service provider for the Queensland Children's Hospital had been the result of many months of careful consideration.

"Over the next four years we will continue working closely with staff from the Mater and the Royal children's hospitals to design and plan a new Queensland Children's Hospital and services that meet the needs of children, young people and their families," Dr Steer said.

Clinicians to deliver a greater say for health professionals

The Rudd Government will invest $58 million to establish Lead Clinicians
Groups in Local Hospital Networks and at a national level.

Lead Clinicians Groups will provide local health professionals - doctors,
nurses and allied health professionals - with a permanent and influential
voice in the National Health and Hospitals Network.

Lead Clinicians Groups are a critical plank in the Government's National
Health and Hospitals Network which will deliver a nationally funded and
locally run health and hospitals system.

The Groups will give medical professionals the resources to develop
innovative clinical solutions to improve the running of their hospitals.

A key finding from the Government's health reform consultation process was
that clinicians feel locked out of and disengaged from the operation of
public hospitals.

This damages staff morale, increases turnover and disrupts patient care.

By establishing Lead Clinicians Groups in Local Hospital Networks, the
Government will ensure that local health professionals have a say on:

- improving quality and safety in hospitals;
- planning the most efficient allocation of services within a Local Hospital
Network;
- developing innovative solutions that best address the needs of local
communities; and
- translating national best practice into local delivery of services.

Lead Clinicians Groups in local communities will be supported by specialist
National Lead Clinicians Groups, who will develop and disseminate evidence
based clinical guidelines.

This will drive safe and high quality hospitals services for Australians.

The Government will work with States and Territories who have already moved
in this direction on making sure this commitment is complementary.

Provision for this announcement has been made in the 2010-11 Budget and it is
fully offset along with the Government's investments to build a National
Health and Hospitals Network.

The Government's historic National Health and Hospitals Network will deliver:

- the Australian Government as the majority funder of hospitals and the
dominant funder of primary care and aged care;
- strong national standards for emergency department and elective surgery
waiting times; and
- a record $7.3 billion in new investments across hospitals, GP and primary
care, aged care, mental health and eHealth.

This will deliver better health and better hospitals for all Australians and
ensure that our health system reflects the excellence of the professionals
who serve the needs of patients every day.


------------------------------

--------------------------------------
Transcript URL: http://www.pm.gov.au/node/6789
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 28 May 2010
News Type: Interview
Title: Interview with David Koch on Sunrise
--------------------------------------------------------------------

KOCH: Prime Minister, thanks for joining us.

PM: Good morning, Kochie.

KOCH: If you knew last October, and some of the letters are dated back in
August, as well, that there was, quote, aan unacceptably high occupational
health and safety risk', why didn't you act then?

PM: Well, what happened, Kochie, was that each time Minister Garrett wrote to
me and informed other ministers that there was a problem with the
implementation of this scheme either on safety or compliance actions were
taken to improve the safety. This happened on at least three, four or five
occasions in the second half of last year.

The scheme came in on 1 July. It went to Cabinet beforehand. It went through
an exhaustive analysis. It was implemented from that time, and then, on a
number of occasions, through that correspondence, the Minister, responding to
industry, responding to concerns out there in the community, said 'here is a
problem. We need to do x, y and z about it'. And what Cabinet and I did
through correspondence was say 'OK, fine, do that', and that's what happened.

But the bottom line is, the measures, at the end of the day, were not
sufficient, and let's just be frank about that.

KOCH: OK, was there a suggestion in any of those recommendations, though, to
say we should stop it, should take a breather, let's reconsider this?

PM: I'm under no- I have no awareness or knowledge of any document sent to me
which said that the scheme should be stopped until, at the end of the day,
the advice came to stop it. What we received all the way though was one
series of recommendations from the Minister, and the letters that have just
been referred to, saying x, y, z needs to be done because a, b and c is going
wrong or needs to be improved, and that's what was ticked off each way
through. But the bottom line is this - mistakes were made. These measures
were not sufficient, and of course there has been a review of these matters
conducted by Mr Hawke. But this has not been a program which has been well
implemented. Let's just accept that as a fact.

KOCH: OK, alright, let's go on to questions now from viewers. We have an
email from Sam. Sam was too nervous to come and put it, so we'll put it to
you. This is very topical at the moment. Given the current logic being
expressed as to why mining companies should have their taxes increased on
super profits, why don't you apply the same logic on the super profits of
banks? Now, does Sam have a point? Why pick on the miners? I mean, you know,
the banks are making massive profits as well.

PM: I think, David, everyone out there understands that the non-renewable
resources of Australia are owned by the Australian people. What happens with
the mining companies is that they rent the use of that resource. That's
what's different about mining.

These resources are owned by the Australian people, and therefore, throughout
our history, have been taxed separately on top of the normal company rate.
For example, in the past what you've had is state governments applying what's
called royalties to get a tax stream coming from those resources, but our
view is if you look over the last 10 years, for every three dollars in profit
earned by the mining companies, one dollar was being paid to the taxpayer
through royalties. Roll it on 10 years, it's for every seven dollars in
profit, one is being paid to the taxpayer through royalties.

So, what we're saying is we just need a fairer share for the Australian
people in order to fund better super; in order to fund tax cuts for small
business; and to fund the future needs of infrastructure.

KOCH: But you're being accused at the moment of undermining the confidence of
the Australian dollar, sort of sparking a share market rout in mining company
share prices which is flowing through to our super funds, so we're getting
poor performance because mining companies are saying 'this is going to hurt
us. We're not going to go ahead with a lot of mines. We're going to pull out
of Australia and go somewhere else.'

PM: David, you're a financial journalist. You know that both those first
propositions are just wrong. On the question of the dollar, any market
analyst will tell you that what's happening with the Australian dollar in the
last week you've seen on currency markets across the world because of
reactions to what's happening with global financial market instability, and,
also, even in our part of the world with events on the Korean peninsula.

And on share markets, let's be very blunt about this - what's happened with
share markets is, again, a response to instability in global financial
markets and our resource stocks in Australia have performed better than the
banking stocks or the financial stocks, and our overall stock exchange has
performed better than most other stock exchanges around the world.

So let's just be clear about this. Obviously, mining companies will complain
if they're asked to pay more tax, but we believe they need to be paying a
fairer share to help with better super for all working people, upping that
rate from 9 per cent to 12 per cent, bringing in company tax cuts for all
companies, 30 down to 28, special tax cuts for small business or tax breaks
for small business, and, of course, better infrastructure investment.

KOCH: Alright, let's go back to our viewers. Shane Holdam is in Melbourne.
Shane, you've got the Prime Minister's ear. Fire away.

VIEWER: Yeah, Mr Rudd, good morning.

PM: G'day Shane.

VIEWER: I get drug tested at work. Why can't we drug test people that are
unemployed, receiving a benefit all the time? A lot of other industries now
get drug tested as well, so why can't - if they want to receive the benefit,
the dole or unemployment - why can't we drug test them?

PM: Well, when we're looking at unemployment benefits and trying to get
people into work, there's a whole series of practical things we've got to do
and I'll come to your specific question just in one sec. If you're under 21,
we have a policy called Earn or Learn, which means that in order to have
access to what's called Youth Allowance they've got to be either in full-time
education, they've either got to be in full-time training, or on top of that,
they've got to be in full-time work. If you're in part time training, you've
got to be out there looking for work, earning or learning, so those folk
don't actually fall through the cracks.

If you're over 21, then of course we have what's called a series of
interviews, initially fortnightly and growing over time, which we've only
just brought in, to make sure that people are out there in a fair dinkum way
looking for work or for identifying their training needs to get them into
work, then to plug them into the right training provider.

You asked specifically about whether, in fact, people should be drug tested.
Look, on the question of those sorts of things, it would strike me as
something which would probably involve all sorts of problems in terms of
civil liberties, but let me just come back to the program whether in fact
there are any other health checks which apply to people on the receipt of New
Start or Youth Allowance. On that one, though, I don't think we have any
plans in mind.

KOCH: OK, thank you for that, Shane. Opposition bringing back the Pacific
Solution as a policy to stop boat people coming in - will you look at
changing your policy more towards the Pacific Solution, because it seemed to
work better than yours?

PM: Well, let's just nail it in one. The so-called Pacific Solution was in
fact a stopover in Nauru for 6 or 12 months, costing the taxpayer $300
million or $400 million, and 70% of those people were then resettled in
Australia or elsewhere. In fact, a very large number ended up back in
Australia. So, let's just call a spade a spade here - it might look good in
the headlines, very expensive and a huge number ended up coming back to
Australia.

The problem with the asylum seekers challenge is that it rises and falls with
what's happening with global security circumstances, whether it's in Sri
Lanka, whether it's in Afghanistan, or whether it's in Iraq, and in the past,
the previous government dealt with this when they had hundreds of boats,
15,000 people come, then it tailed off for a while, then it began, of course,
in recent years to rise again because of events in Sri Lanka and elsewhere.

We will maintain a balanced policy on this, a hardline policy tough on people
smugglers, and anyone who's not a genuine refugee gets sent back home.

KOCH: Alright. Run out of time, but can we give you some homework for next
week-

PM: -By all means.

KOCH: -Give the details of the family of John Parsons. John, from Bendigo,
died in Hawaii while trekking in 2008. The family says the investigation into
his death there has dragged on for so long they still can't bring the body
home. Can you make some inquiries on their behalf and see if they can speed
things up?

PM: These deaths of loved ones abroad are always really hard, so let's get to
the details and come back to you.

KOCH: Terrific. Thank you. Good to see you.

PM: Likewise.

ORAL ALLERGY SYNDROME

What is an “Oral Allergy Syndrome”?

Oral allergy syndrome is an allergic (immunologic) reaction to certain proteins in a variety of fruits, vegetables and nuts, which develops in some people with pollen allergies. It is referred to as an oral allergy syndrome because it usually affects the mouth and throat.

These reactions are not related to pesticides or metals.

Who is affected and what pollens are involved ?

Oral allergy syndrome is nearly always preceded by hay fever and tends to occur most often in older children and adults. It is usually associated with birch-pollen allergies but it can also affect people with allergies to the pollens of grass, ragweed (more common in North America) and mugwort (more common in Europe). These reactions can occur at any time of year, but are often worse during the pollen season involved.

What are the symptoms and when do they occur ?

Symptoms may include itching and burning of the lips, mouth and throat, watery itchy eyes, runny nose and sneezing. Some individuals report that peeling or touching the offending foods may result in a rash, itching or swelling where the juice touches the skin. More serious reactions can include hives and swelling of the mouth, pharynx and windpipe. In rare cases, severe allergic reactions have been reported such as vomiting and diarrhea, bronchial asthma, generalized hives and anaphylactic shock. Symptoms usually develop within minutes of consuming or touching the food, but occasionally occur more than an hour later.

Are all reactions to fruits and vegetables associated with "Oral Allergy Syndrome" ?

No. A variety of fruits, vegetables and their juices, including orange, tomato, apple and grape, sometimes cause skin rashes and diarrhea, especially in young children. Strawberries occasionally cause hives

What foods are involved ?

Foods associated with birch, ragweed, grass and mugwort pollen are listed in the following table. Most reactions are caused by raw foods, since allergenic proteins are usually destroyed by cooking (i.e., heat labile). The main exceptions to this are celery and nuts which may cause reactions even after being cooked. Some plant parts, such as the skin, may be more allergenic than others, however the allergic characteristics of some fruits seems to decrease during storage. Foods associated with the oral allergy syndrome which have occasionally been reported to cause anaphylactic reactions include: kiwi, hazelnut, white potato, celery, parsley, beans, and cumin..

FOODS MOST COMMONLY ASSOCIATED WITH
BIRCH, RAGWEED, GRASS AND MUGWORT POLLENS

 

Allergies to this type of Pollen

May also trigger an allergic reaction to these foods

Birch

Fruits
kiwi, apple, pear, plum, prune, peach, nectarine, apricot, cherry
Vegetables
celery, carrot, parsnips, parsley, dill, anise, cumin, coriander, caraway, fennel, potato, tomato, green pepper, lentils, peas, beans, peanut
Nuts
hazelnut, walnut, almond
Seeds
sunflower

Ragweed

Fruits
banana, watermelon, cantaloupe, honeydew
Vegetables
zucchini, cucumber

Grass

Fruits
melon, watermelon, tomato, orange, kiwi

Mugwort

Fruits
apple, watermelon, melon
Vegetables
celery, carrot

 

What can sensitive individuals do to avoid a reaction?

Individuals who are hypersensitive to the foods identified in the above table usually find that they can consume these foods if they are well cooked, canned or micro waved. People who develop a rash, itching or swelling when touching or peeling these foods may prevent this by wearing gloves.

Consultation with a qualified allergist is recommended to determine the cause of reactions to plant foods, and whether any special precautions are advisable.

Reference :

Zarkadas M, F.M. Scott, J. Salminen, A. Ham Pong. Common Allergenic Foods and Their Labelling in Canada - A Review. Canadian Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 1999;4:118-141.