Page 738 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 24 March 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
In terms of timing, I must say that I am a little bit disappointed to hear the Minister say that, on the one hand, his Government is facing extraordinary administrative and legal difficulties in bringing this major reform into place. He has had some 20 months to deal with the issue; yet he criticised the Alliance Government for not bringing anything to fruition in the space of seven months between the bringing down of the Balancing Rights report in November 1990 and our losing office in June 1991. I do not really understand that.
Mr Kaine: It is the quick, quick; slow, slow.
MR HUMPHRIES: Obviously it is. We were slow, slow in seven months and he has been quick, quick in 17 months. I do not understand that. Perhaps he can explain it to my simple mind at some later stage.
Mr Berry: I do not think it is possible.
MR HUMPHRIES: It certainly would not be possible to explain it to your mind, Mr Berry. I do not know about my mind, but your mind is a total write-off. Madam Speaker, I think there is bipartisan support around this chamber for action in this area, and I am happy to see the deadline on the Government removed from the motion; but I think that should not be in any way an indication that we are not particularly anxious about when new mental health legislation comes down. We are anxious. We need to see these changes, and I am sure that the Minister will appreciate from the debate today from all sides of the chamber that we see urgent action as being extremely important.
MRS CARNELL (12.11), in reply: Madam Speaker, this motion has been on the notice paper since last August, and it was first debated in October. That is six months ago, and still we have not seen the promised new mental health legislation. It seems to be an ongoing saga of delays when it comes to any action in this very important area. Balancing Rights, as a number of speakers have said, was tabled in 1990. It took the Government over two years to respond. Even after all that time - something that concerns me greatly - none of the recommendations have any timeframes attached.
Madam Speaker, per capita funding for mental health services in the ACT is the lowest of any State or Territory in Australia. It is, or was last year, approximately 70 per cent of New South Wales funding and 60 per cent of the funding in Victoria and South Australia. Presently, there are simply insufficient funds allocated to mental health to provide the level of services present in most other States. In the government response to Balancing Rights, only seven of the 59 recommendations were not agreed to, and I commend the Government for that. What the Government must now do is to put aside the resources - and that is not always money; it is often time and people - to bring these recommendations to fruition. It is my view that at least 24 of the recommendations will require some degree of extra resourcing, and I urge the Government to do all they can to make those resources available.
My motion contains three parts. The first part is that "the Government proceed quickly" - and I underline "quickly" - "to a Bill for a new Mental Health Act". Obviously, we have a very different view of what "quickly" means, but I am very pleased to hear that the Government will support that.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .