Medical Board of Western Australia

Mr Bevis asked the Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 9 December 2004:

1. Is she aware of the decision of the Medical Board of Western Australia, delivered on 20 July 2004, following its inquiry into the conduct of a Medical Doctor, a Navy Reserve Commander, which found him guilty on a number of charges relating to improper conduct, misconduct and gross carelessness or incompetency in respect of his conduct as a naval doctor, involving a female Lieutenant Commander who was at that time the Executive Officer at HMAS Stirling in Western Australia.
2. Can she confirm that the Board commented unfavourably on the Navy Reserve Commander, in particular, that (a) it had "significant concern about the evidence of the Practitioner. Some aspects of it were entirely unconvincing. Others raise serious questions as to its reliability and his veracity", and (b) the fact that "he permitted a sworn statement of his evidence-in-chief to be tendered knowing that it was inaccurate is particularly disturbing", and (c) "The Practitioner displayed... a willingness to give evidence which was at odds with what appeared in his written statement".
3. Can she confirm that the Board concluded that the conduct of the Practitioner was found to have been unacceptable and identified a number of serious deficiencies in the discharge of his professional obligations and marked departures from the standard of care, treatment and management demanded of a competent general practitioner.
4. Can she confirm that the Board also concluded that the proven wrongdoing of the Practitioner was not confined to a single aspect of his care, treatment and management of his patient and encompassed a diverse range of failures and multiple infractions and that the nature and broad range of his professional misconduct required the Board to take action to protect the public interest.
5. Has the Department of Defence made any payments for the Reserve Doctor's legal representation, penalties or costs associated with this matter, including inquiries conducted by the Defence Ombudsman and the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission.
6. Can she confirm that the medical board concluded the female victim gave evidence in a way that might be expected of a long-serving and senior officer in the Australian Defence Force and that neither her demeanour nor her performance as a witness was reflective of a lack of truthfulness.
7. Can she confirm that the female victim has not received any financial support for costs associated with these matters.
8. Will she ensure that the victim receives full and proper compensation for her costs and damages caused by the improper conduct of the Navy Reserve medical officer.
9. Was the medical officer the same person who administered inoculations to Australian troops deployed to Iraq, giving rise to complaints by some troops who refused to have the inoculations.
10. Has the medical officer since been recommended for promotion.
11. What disciplinary action has been taken against the medical officer.

Mrs Kelly - The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

1. Yes.
2. (a), (b) and (c) I am advised that the Medical Board of Western Australia, in its reasons for decision, made such comments.
3. I am advised that the Medical Board of Western Australia, in its reasons for decision, made such findings.
4. I am advised that the Medical Board of Western Australia, in its reasons for decision, indicated that it had reached such findings.
5. Yes. In accordance with the Attorney-General's Legal Services Directions made pursuant to Judiciary Act 1903 section 55ZF, the costs of legal representation and part of the Board's costs of the proceedings, which it ordered Commander McKenzie to pay, were met as part of the assistance.
6. I am advised that the Medical Board of Western Australia, in its reasons for decision, indicated that it had reached such conclusions.
7. I am advised that the female Lieutenant requested the Navy to meet the expense of her next-of-kin travelling to Perth from Melbourne so he could serve as her legal adviser. This request was considered not to be within the legal assistance regime established by the Attorney-General's Legal Services Directions. A subsequent request that the Navy meet the costs of the female Lieutenant Commander's civilian legal representative during a conciliation meeting called by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, which is investigating a compliant relating to the issue before the Medical Board of Western Australia, was refused for the same reason.
8. Matters of compensation and damages are determined in accordance with the law by the appropriate Court or Tribunal.
9. I am advised that the officer was posted as the Medical Officer on HMAS Kanimbla during the Iraq war where he was required to implement Australian Defence Force policy on immunisations.
10. I am advised that the latest Navy Officer Performance Appraisal Report on the medical officer is held for the period ending 17 July 2003. In this report, he was assessed by his supervisor (the Commanding Officer of HMAS Kanimbla) as being highly suitable for the next rank. This report was considered by the Navy's Career Advancement Board in December 2004. The Chief of Navy's promotion signal of 17 December 2004 did not include the medical officer.
11. None.

close