If Peter Coaldrake wants to look at the trickery behind some of the State Government’s decisions, he should go straight to the most crucial portfolio – health.

Not only does the Government’s own recent diagnosis of its health system show a lack of accountability, it goes to how government is directed almost solely, it seems, at staying in power – over serving those who put it there in the first place.

And this federal election campaign illustrates with startling clarity how much of a political football health – which should be the exemplar of public service delivery – has become.

Back to the Palaszczuk government in just a moment, but health is just another frontier where States are brawling with the Commonwealth, in a bid for more funds. They want billions of dollars in funding – and neither federal party has yet come to the party.

But it’s less about fixing the health problems, and more about political opportunism; scoring a political point during an election campaign. States have been ripped off, they say. People are not getting the treatment they need because of the Commonwealth, they say. Scott Morrison cannot be trusted with the health of the nation, they say.

That might all be true – but where’s the debate about policy and what needs to be done and how it could change the woeful services now struggling to meet demand.

The State Government’s most recent expose of the health system shows just how political the portfolio has now become.

That probe, an inquiry into the provision of primary, allied and private health care, aged care and NDIS care services and its impact on the Queensland public health system, looks like a partisan cheap attempt to make the Commonwealth look bad and the State look good.

It reads as though its purpose is for the Coalition to look responsible for the shameful state of some of Queensland’s health services. And for the Palaszczuk Government – which commissioned the report – to look blameless.

Only 10 percent of recommendations are directed specifically at Queensland, and here’s the apparent trickery. It almost seems as though it was released to coincide with the election campaign.

Ironically, it also comes as Queenslanders are forced to wait ridiculous amounts of time to talk to someone on the COVID hotline, before they are directed online, where the site is not working.

It comes as ambulance after ambulance sits outside hospitals, waiting for access.

And it comes as sick Queenslanders could not access paramedic services and triple zero calls reach historic levels.

But if the Palasczcuk Government had it its way, it would all be seen as the Commonwealth’s fault.

Now some of it is!

But the State Government’s ability to trick, hide, disguise and play politics with health reached a new level with this inquiry, which involved goodness knows how many staff, hours, and hearings all funded by you, the taxpayer.

And perhaps this time it’s the dissenting report, titled Statements of Reservation, from Opposition MPs Rob Molhoek and Sam O’Connor that deserve attention.

“From how long it takes for an ambulance to arrive, through to waiting times to see a specialist, our public health system is buckling under extreme pressure,’’ they said.

“Yet, in the midst of this crisis for which it is ultimately responsible, the State Government chose to launch a Parliamentary inquiry into everything but Queensland Health. It beggars belief.’’

The inquiry was a “political weapon’’, they said, to be used during the campaign, and involved committee time and resources to politically advantage Labor.

And they raise some valuable questions.

What is Labor doing about the elective surgery waiting list which has doubled to almost 60,000 over the past seven years?

Why is one in 10 Queenslanders waiting longer than is clinically recommended for surgery?

Why are up to 40 percent of patients arriving by ambulance not “offloaded’ at a hospital within the recommended time?

Why are some patients waiting for eight hours to see a doctor or a nurse?

The Palaszczuk Government’s decision to commission, use taxpayer funds, and release a report in what looks like a political campaign salvo should be underwhelming to everyone who reads it.

And it should be a case study for Peter Coaldrake as he navigates recommending a system where voters should expect accountability, transparency and basic service delivery.