Hon House Chair, I wish to thank members for unanimously supporting this Bill. It certainly holds out the hope of quality affordable health care for our people. I am sure that even in this House there are members who might have forgotten that public health facilities, clinics, hospitals and health care centres can be innovative and work and function very well.
I am saddened when I recall that the very first successful heart transplant, not only in South Africa but in the whole world, was conducted in a public hospital. I have met a number of people who have forgotten that. We want to bring back those days, when even people like you, hon members, will find it possible to utilise public hospitals.
I want to share a painful experience about our country. The Quality Care Commission in Britain helped us to put together this Bill. The CEO of the National Health System in Britain was central in workshopping various structures in our country while dealing with this Bill. One day he said, "Minister, let me ask you a question. What are you South Africans trying to do? Because I do not understand what you are all doing." He went on and said, "Everybody in your country who has a name, a title and a salary believes that when they get sick they should use only private hospitals and nothing else." He further said, "Minister, come to Britain - the rich, the powerful and the mighty utilise public hospitals. You cannot afford to destroy public hospitals in your country." We have been working with those words at the back of our minds. That is why this Bill is so important and that is why I am happy that it is supported.
I want to deal with two issues that were raised by hon members. The first is the issue of independence. Ever since we started discussions on this Bill, this issue cropped up time and time again. We believe there are enough mechanisms in the Bill to assure professional independence. That is why, after inspection, whatever comes out of the report will not be hidden. It will be made public. Because we deal with issues of public interest, hon members should not play politics, but must work in the public's interest.
What do we actually mean by independence? While I was listening, it seemed to me that in this country when we say a structure is independent, we mean that it is another opposition party. Opposition parties are here in Parliament and are elected to do the work of opposition parties. But we are called upon to create structures that must work as opposition parties. I think that is unfair. We give adequate independence to our structures.
Let me give an example. We have the Health Professions Council of SA, which was called the SA Medical and Dental Council. We gave it independence. You will never have heard reports of the Health Professions Council taking a doctor through a disciplinary hearing and striking the doctor off the roll only for the doctor to appeal to the Minister and the Minister reversing that decision. That has never happened.
There was a situation that nearly made me cry: the Health Professions Council condoned a doctor who had raped, saying that because there were so very few doctors they could not strike that doctor from the roll. I nearly cried, but because they are an independent structure I could not go against them and say, "Please, expel this one." I actually wanted that doctor to be expelled, but because of the independence we gave them, I could not do that.
However, whenever this body commits an error, people call on the Minister - even from within the opposition parties, I will remind you, especially the DA, the official opposition. Whenever a foreign doctor wants to get into South Africa and the Health Professions Council has a problem with registering them, remember that it is an independent body. It can decide against registering someone. The first thing the public says is, "Where is the Minister? Why can't the Minister intervene?" And this is the very structure to which they say the Minister must give independence!
I am sure you listen to the news. The Health Professions Council has just come up with tariffs - the so-called ethical tariffs - which doctors will charge or, if they do not follow those tariffs, be taken to the disciplinary committee. It is their decision and I was never involved. I was listening the whole morning, and people were saying, "Where is the Minister? What did the Minister do? Why all those tariffs?" But this was done by an independent structure to which I gave independence.
Whenever that structure makes what people perceive as a mistake, they call for the Minister. When there is no problem, they say, "Independence!" I want hon members to be careful about this issue and to tell us exactly what they are talking about. However, I am sure that the structure we are forming through this Bill will be given enough independence to do its work.
The last issue I want to deal with is that of appointing qualified managers. We will definitely do that. We have been talking about this matter in Parliament for a long time, Mrs Segale-Diswai, and I can promise you that advertisements have been placed and we want all our hospitals to have CEOs with a health background as their initial qualification. [Applause.] We have actually advertised and the short-listing process is taking place.
We are going to establish a Public Health Management Institute, which will be run by Harvard University, the University of Pretoria and the University of Fort Hare. These three universities are going to run a health management institute. The preparation is far advanced.
After interviewing individuals who applied for the jobs of CEOs of our hospitals, we will not allow them to go to work immediately. They will have to go through this institution for training. It is not going to be a physical institution, but Harvard, Pretoria and Fort Hare universities will set up a curriculum and a training programme. Only after going through that programme will we allow them to take up jobs as CEOs of hospitals.
In future, anyone who will manage a health care system will have to get qualifications from this institution. We will later bring information about this but I thought I should take this opportunity to inform the House. Thank you. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
Bill read a second time (Democratic Alliance dissenting).