Page 4082 - Week 15 - Thursday, 17 December 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The only reasonable option that the committee identified was joint venturing. I would like at this point to express thanks to Ralph Cartwright, a member of the Working Group on Retirees and the Frail Aged set up by the South East Economic Development Council. He submitted this strategy of joint venturing. The details are set out at paragraphs 7.5 to 7.7; so I will not take up the Assembly's time by outlining them. I believe that we should thank Mr Cartwright for his efforts in identifying what I regard as the only way that we can help these people who are caught in the middle between the APUs and the potential buyers of higher accommodation.
Joint venturing, Madam Speaker, will enable the Government to maintain control and to make sure that its intentions towards this group in this community - it is a quite large group of people - are realised. The Government's involvement in joint venturing would avoid undertakings being broken and perhaps that could result in higher-quality construction taking place. Mr Wood knows what I mean, because we had that problem out at Palmerston with some trees, as I recall, where some unscrupulous developers were quite happy to break the terms of the agreement to what they thought was their advantage. I do not believe, Madam Speaker, that joint venturing is an ideal solution; but it certainly is the best that the committee could come up with. I repeat that this suggestion was the result of quite prolonged discussions and questioning of such expert witnesses as the Real Estate Institute and development and construction companies.
In conclusion, Madam Speaker, while the report's 26 recommendations present a comprehensive coverage of all services relating to aged accommodation and support services in the ACT, I think I should draw attention to the fact that no costings have been carried out. While I personally do not welcome what I call "wish list" reports - those which appear to be predicated upon unlimited funding - I think it is true in the case of this report that a number of the recommendations already have been recognised, even if no action has yet occurred. I would give as an example the case of the convalescent facility that everybody in this Assembly agrees needs to be established here in the ACT. I think that other recommendations are quite sensibly and responsibly qualified. The reference to HACC funding at recommendation 13 is an example.
The report, I believe, thus stands as a good one. It is sensible and I believe that its recommendations are practical. I further believe that those of its recommendations that cannot be implemented at the moment will certainly stand as a blueprint for the future in the provision of aged accommodation and support services in the ACT.
MS SZUTY (12.10): Madam Speaker, I endorse the comments made by the chair of the Social Policy Committee, Ms Ellis, and my fellow committee members, in her tabling of the committee's report and their speeches, and I wish to take the opportunity now to add my own comments. Members may remember that earlier this year I submitted a dissenting report to the Assembly calling for the Social Policy Committee to address the question of youth unemployment rather than the issue of aged accommodation and support services in the ACT. I believe that youth unemployment still remains to be adequately addressed. However, I have participated freely and willingly in the Social Policy Committee's current inquiry, the results of which have been tabled today by Ms Ellis.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .