Page 217 - Week 01 - Thursday, 15 February 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
mentally disabled and the decision maker has a right to expect that the law will provide an adequate scheme to support them. This is necessary because many decisions can have legal implications.
Under the law as it now stands orders issued by the Supreme Court are largely confined to property matters and provide limited coverage for other decisions of a personal nature. In addition, the Lunacy Act 1898 is a law of a bygone era. It does not cater for those afflicted with senile dementia or drug and alcohol induced illnesses. While a Supreme Court order may be subject to appeal, the current law does not allow the court to make those orders subject to periodic review. The absence of periodic review is inconsistent with the United States declaration on the rights of mentally retarded persons. We are fast approaching the twenty-first century, yet ACT citizens are reliant upon the provisions of a nineteenth century law. A new legal scheme is required, and the Australian Law Reform Commission's report admirably addresses the issues involved.
The commission recommends the establishment of a guardianship tribunal and the appointment of a public advocate. The commission proposes the tribunal have jurisdiction to make guardianship or management of property orders and to appoint guardians or managers for any resident in need of an order.
The role of the public advocate would be twofold: firstly, primarily, to provide guardianship services acting as a guardian of the last resort where no individual is ready, able or willing to act as a guardian of a person; and secondly, having an advocacy role, promote community involvement in decision making.
The recommendations contained in the committee's report, prima facie, provide a valuable improvement in this area of law in the ACT. However, a number of areas of the report will require careful consideration, particularly in the light of their budgetary effects.
In tabling this report, I am aware of the close interest that will be taken in its contents by the ACT community. For this reason I invite comments on the report. Comments can be directed to the Human Rights and Community Law Section of the ACT Government Law Office. I have also asked the Law Office to consult widely with professional bodies and community groups on the recommendations in the report. Following these consultations the Law Office will be preparing an options paper for the Government. At this stage it would be premature to say that the Government will give a full effect to the report. I am optimistic, however, that the analysis of the report will see a more responsive and more relevant legislative scheme to deal with this important community matter.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .