Page 475 - Week 02 - Thursday, 14 May 1992

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .

---

being is really no different from what applies to any other charitable organisation running accommodation for such people and in receipt of government funds. Indeed, there is not a great deal of difference between Ainslie Village and, say, the Salvation Army's Mancare facility.

However, there is a difference. The difference is that, unlike such a worthy organisation as the Salvos - and may I put a plug in here, please, for the Red Shield Appeal later this month, to which I hope you will all contribute substantially - Ainslie Village Ltd has been the subject of complaints from residents over the first 12 months of its operation. These complaints culminated in April 1991 with the decision of the then Minister for Housing and Community Services, Mr Bernard Collaery - - -

Mr De Domenico: Who?

MR CORNWELL: Mr Bernard Collaery. The decision was to establish a review of Ainslie Village Ltd, to be conducted by an independent consultant from outside the ACT. The review, apart from responding to residents' complaints, also conformed to Mr Collaery's own wish that a review be conducted within 12 months of Ainslie Village Ltd commencing operations. Those operations began around March or April 1990.

The establishment of the review was confirmed by letter dated 15 April 1991 to a resident. The terms of reference were developed as follows, and they are worth quoting:

The review should examine and assess whether the Company has:

. interpreted its Articles and Memorandum of Association in an equitable manner;

. vested in the General Manager of the Village decision making powers in relation to the day to day management of the Village;

. given staff and residents ample opportunity to be involved in decision making processes;

. operated Ainslie Village in a responsible, effective and efficient manner;

and, as a result determine whether an appropriate standard of service has been provided to residents both existing and prospective.

Emphasis must be placed during the review on the roles and responsibilities of:

. the existing Board structure, including the Chairperson, the Board Executive and the sub-committees,

. the office bearers of the Company, and

. the staffing structure of the Village.

Consideration must also be given to the principles of SAAP.

---

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .