Page 1891 - Week 07 - Thursday, 20 August 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
occasions - provides exactly what it says, namely, a shelter for men who are homeless. A women's refuge provides a 24-hour crisis service for women and children who are suffering trauma, hopelessness, betrayal and grief, as well as physical and psychological injury.
A survivor of assault in the home has very complex and demanding needs in terms of recovery and survival for the future, both economic and emotional. They must house and care for a family; attend court cases where they must face their attacker, who is also often the father of their children and the man they trusted; and overcome their fears and develop some self-worth after surviving probably for years with abuse and fear. They must do all this while also fearing a reprisal, their only protection being the anonymous address and the workers in the house.
To suggest that funds for all these programs should be administered by the Treasury rather than by the ACT Housing Trust, as has been the case, is nonsense. It is eminently sensible that the body administering the program is the one that administers the funds for that program. The agreement between the ACT and the Commonwealth, renegotiated in 1989, has ensured that funds for the supported accommodation and related support services are targeted for those groups most in need in each State. These target groups currently are: Firstly, young people; secondly, women with children who are homeless and/or in crisis as a result of domestic violence; thirdly, families, including single parent families; then single men; and, finally, single women. It is sad indeed that these refuges are needed. That four times their present number could probably be filled tomorrow is also sad. And it is sad that we debate the trifling, insignificant details surrounding the issue, instead of attempting to address the issue itself.
Motion (by Mr Berry) agreed to, with the concurrence of an absolute majority:
That so much of the standing and temporary orders be suspended as would prevent consideration of orders of the day Nos 1 and 2, Assembly business, from taking precedence of Executive business, for the remainder of this sitting.
MRS CARNELL (11.24): I need to start by stating again - and it should be something that everybody here knows - that the Liberal Party totally support the SAAP program. Supported accommodation is something very near and dear to all our hearts and something that is amazingly important, as Mr Moore appropriately said, in these days of increasing domestic violence. I am sure also that everybody here knows that the Liberal Party had no choice but to take this approach, as we do not have the capacity to amend a determination of this sort. All we can possibly do is move disallowance if we want the matter debated.
We believe that the central issue here is the issue of community consultation. Mr Connolly rightly said that community consultation is quite central to this whole approach, and he said that there were procedures in place. That is very interesting, because the number of letters we have on this issue from people in the community who believe, rightly or wrongly, that they have not been consulted is tremendous. This lack of community consultation has been the problem for the people who are using this supported accommodation. They are the people who have suffered from it. It is this lack of consultation that has caused the social isolation of these centres. The neighbours are now angry; they mistrust the whole process that achieved this situation. They are now fearful of the unknown, and I think fear of the unknown is quite central to this whole procedure.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .