Page 530 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 19 May 1992

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


MR CONNOLLY: I thank the member for her question, which is a very sensible one. The problem is that, no matter what resources are put in, there remains an unmet demand for respite care. This Territory provides resources for intellectual disability care at a quite substantial level. We spend just under $8m - about $7,700,000-odd - per year on intellectual disability services, which is a substantial effort. Members would be aware that there is some criticism of the ACT from people such as the Grants Commission, who say that we spend too much on community services and welfare related areas of expenditure. I am sure that all members on this side of the chamber, and no doubt Ms Szuty, would take the view, as Labor does, that in a rich community such as Canberra we ought to be making a better than average effort.

But, that having been said, it still remains the fact that there can be unmet demands. With an ageing population, as we have in Canberra, those demands are increasing. One answer would be to pour more money into the problem; but, given the ACT budget and given that in the sector we currently overexpend, I do not think that is a realistic solution. The solution must be to move to better deploy the resources that we now have. At the moment the substantial sum of money that is spent provides for only 140 full-time care positions, which works out at a cost of about $55,000 per full-time care position. That is a very high cost compared with other parts of Australia. We have a staff-to-client ratio of 1:3. That is very high. Other States are working on ratios of between 1:4 and 1:6.

The move that has occurred over successive governments away from institutional care at places such as Bruce into community houses is addressing that problem. It is providing care at different ratios; it is providing a saving of money. But the most important reason why it is being done by this Government, as it was by the former Government, is not that it saves money but that it provides a significantly improved quality of life for the clients as well as spreading the resource across more clients. We intend to continue to go down that path.

At the moment what Ms Szuty says is true. There is an unmet demand for respite care. Respite care is provided directly from the ACT Government through Birralee for younger children and at Finniss Crescent for adults. But, because of increased demands, we are now providing that about one week in seven, as opposed to one week in four, which was the position some years ago. There is also home-based respite care provided through Fabric, which although a community-based organisation is funded through both the Commonwealth disability services program and the HACC program. That Commonwealth disability program is something that is likely to devolve to the States when all the States that are party to the disability agreement come into it. The Disability Services Act of the ACT, of course, was passed late last year.

While I cannot promise an instant solution - other than anyone saying "Well, we should just double our expenditure and thus double the resource", and I think that is an irresponsible approach - I can say that we are working towards deploying our considerable resources so that they are put into this problem in a more equitable manner. The dilemma, of course, is that that will not meet individual demands. All I can say on that matter from the Government's point of view is that we have to allocate resources in accordance with priorities. We will continue to do that. When a vacancy occurs, the IDS staff - who would at all times be aware of the individual circumstances of, say, the half-dozen most high-need families in the Territory - would make a decision based on who at the time of the vacancy has the most need for the resource. We will not be swayed by any media or other promotion to interfere in that priority allocation task.


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