Ayla
16-12-2008, 07:58 AM
:headshake
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24747903-3102,00.html
Patrick Lion
December 03, 2008 11:00pm
A STATE Government department responsible for looking after children considers bad publicity more important than a death in a school.
A leaked Education Queensland risk matrix policy document tabled by the Opposition in State Parliament yesterday revealed the ranking system public servants should use when notifying bureaucrats of issues.
"Sustained adverse publicity" was ranked in the worst category of critical but "loss of life or permanent injury" was considered less serious in the major category below.
Other results considered less important than bad publicity included a 10 per cent financial impact on the budget or long delays to programs.
The existence of the rankings has emerged three years after former health inquiry commissioner Geoff Davies labelled a similar document used by Queensland Health as "shocking".
Opposition Leader Lawrence Springborg yesterday questioned how the Government could still be using such a system.
"After 10 long years, the Beattie-Bligh Labor Government has clearly lost its way when it is more concerned about bad news stories than people's lives," Mr Springborg said.
However, Premier Anna Bligh defended the document, saying the critical category also included "multiple deaths" alongside the bad publicity.
"Yes, it lists 'sustained adverse publicity'," Ms Bligh said.
"Of course the department would have to deal with that.
"That is just one example of what would be a critical risk in the category of managing the external environment."
But Mr Springborg said the loss of one life should be considered more important than a bad run in the media. According to the Davies Commission of Inquiry report, former Bundaberg health bureaucrat Peter Leck testified that decisions were made by reference to a risk matrix which rated "significant and sustained statewide adverse publicity" on the same level as "loss of life".
Furthermore, "sustained national publicity: QH reputation significantly damaged" was on the same level as "multiple deaths".
"The view, which seems to be that of Queensland Health, that substantial adverse publicity is as serious a consequence as multiple deaths, is shocking," Mr Davies found.
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24747903-3102,00.html
Patrick Lion
December 03, 2008 11:00pm
A STATE Government department responsible for looking after children considers bad publicity more important than a death in a school.
A leaked Education Queensland risk matrix policy document tabled by the Opposition in State Parliament yesterday revealed the ranking system public servants should use when notifying bureaucrats of issues.
"Sustained adverse publicity" was ranked in the worst category of critical but "loss of life or permanent injury" was considered less serious in the major category below.
Other results considered less important than bad publicity included a 10 per cent financial impact on the budget or long delays to programs.
The existence of the rankings has emerged three years after former health inquiry commissioner Geoff Davies labelled a similar document used by Queensland Health as "shocking".
Opposition Leader Lawrence Springborg yesterday questioned how the Government could still be using such a system.
"After 10 long years, the Beattie-Bligh Labor Government has clearly lost its way when it is more concerned about bad news stories than people's lives," Mr Springborg said.
However, Premier Anna Bligh defended the document, saying the critical category also included "multiple deaths" alongside the bad publicity.
"Yes, it lists 'sustained adverse publicity'," Ms Bligh said.
"Of course the department would have to deal with that.
"That is just one example of what would be a critical risk in the category of managing the external environment."
But Mr Springborg said the loss of one life should be considered more important than a bad run in the media. According to the Davies Commission of Inquiry report, former Bundaberg health bureaucrat Peter Leck testified that decisions were made by reference to a risk matrix which rated "significant and sustained statewide adverse publicity" on the same level as "loss of life".
Furthermore, "sustained national publicity: QH reputation significantly damaged" was on the same level as "multiple deaths".
"The view, which seems to be that of Queensland Health, that substantial adverse publicity is as serious a consequence as multiple deaths, is shocking," Mr Davies found.