Govt unmoved as clinicians slam hospital plan

The state government is standing by its controversial decision to relocate the $1.8 billion maternity hospital to Murdoch despite strong condemnation of the move by Western Australia’s most experienced clinicians.

In April, the 20-kilometre move from Perth Children’s Hospital to Fiona Stanley was revealed to avoid what the government claimed would be delays upwards of two decades had it proceeded with the build at the Nedlands campus.

A draft document aired by Nine News Perth on Tuesday night revealed the government’s Child and Adolescent Health Service strongly objected to the proposal, claiming emergency transfers by road between the maternity hospital and PCH would increase the risk of tragedy.

The draft paper found locating the maternity hospital next to PCH would be the best option to “ensure that critically ill women and babies receive timely, life-saving care and achieve optimal health outcomes”.

“The research is clear, neonatal transfer is associated with increased mortality and lasting developmental impairment,” the draft document said.

“Only tri-location provides neonates access to time-critical emergency care.”

Responding to the report on Wednesday, Premier Roger Cook hosed down concerns the Murdoch move could not go ahead without support of senior clinicians.

“We will continue to consult with the clinicians around the complex issues that feed into that decision making process,” Mr Cook said.

“We need to get on and develop the new women's and babies hospital, the fastest way we can do that is develop it at Fiona Stanley Hospital.

“The decision to relocate the women’s and babies hospital at the Fiona Stanley Hospital site is about bringing those services on sooner, and making sure we can have the opportunity to provide world leading women's gynecological and maternity services sooner rather than later.”

He said the Murdoch site would improve hospital access for regional patients using the Royal Flying Doctor Service.

Opposition health spokesperson Libby Mettam said the paper made it clear child health experts did not support the move.

“The minister has been unequivocally warned that babies could die as a result of this decision,” she said.

“It is unconscionable that she would proceed with this risky move given the depth of serious concern raised by clinical health professionals.

“Forging ahead with such a dangerous plan, regardless of the risks highlighted by the government’s own child health experts is reckless and arrogant.

Ms Mettam said moving ahead with the relocation showed reckless disregard for expert views.