Page 3020 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 14 September 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
the recommendations of Balancing Rights. I see from a quick scan of the budget papers that there are areas within the budget that are implementing some of the recommendations from Balancing Rights. There is my first comment in this Assembly on the budget, and it is a positive one.
The Social Policy Committee inquiring into this issue thoroughly gives the community an opportunity to know that they have been heard and considered. It is part of tying them into a process, giving them ownership of a process, which Mr Connolly started by making a draft exposure Bill available. I feel very positively that we will get an excellent outcome from this process and a better Bill.
Mr Lamont: You are agreeing, are you?
MR MOORE: I agree. I support it, yes.
MS ELLIS (4.20): As chairperson of the Standing Committee on Social Policy, there are a couple of things I want to speak about in terms of the process. Having heard Mr Moore on the radio earlier today, I do not wish in any way to pre-empt the decision by the Social Policy Committee on how it will handle this issue. The decisions on whether there are public hearings, whether submissions will be received and so on will be made by the committee as a whole. I think it is fair to put that on the record.
As with the adoption legislation, which the Social Policy Committee examined late last year and early this year in very quick time, I expect that the committee, for the sake of the people who are awaiting the passage of adequate legislation, will respond in an equally quick fashion. In saying that, and having heard the Minister, when moving this motion, comment on our discussions in relation to the reporting date, I note that it is a very tight timeframe. From now to the end of that timeframe is also the period in which the Assembly, as a committee of the whole, goes through the Estimates Committee process.
From my experience with the Social Policy Committee, I expect that during this new inquiry a great degree of manoeuvrability will be required on the part of committee members in order to meet that date. We have to keep in mind those people who are desperately awaiting this legislation, and work hard to bring this process to an expeditious conclusion. Members of the committee will be hearing from us very soon about a possible timetable of sittings, and I look forward to the very quick conclusion of the issue.
MR HUMPHRIES (4.22): Madam Speaker, we support this motion. We are concerned about the reception the Mental Welfare Bill has had since its tabling. The Deputy Chief Minister is right to describe this as extremely sensitive legislation. I must say that the extremely insensitive reaction of his colleague the Minister for Community Services did not generate any hope on my part that this process will be dealt with as sensitively as it seems to deserve.
You cannot engage in a process of community consultation and then be taken aback when people express their point of view in strong terms. The fact is that people do feel very aggrieved by parts of the process which do not meet their expectations and they do have a strong desire to make sure that what they feel are mistakes on the part of the Government, questions of direction, are addressed properly. In those circumstances, they have the right to make their point of view well known. We saw the extraordinary spectacle of the Minister tabling
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .