Page 3716 - Week 12 - Thursday, 21 October 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I am looking forward to a very non-political inquiry. For the sake of the people involved in the subject of this referral, a non-political approach by the committee is absolutely essential, as well as a balanced and open-minded approach. As chair of the committee, I do not have any preconceptions on a lot of the issues we are going to examine, and I find that a quite comfortable position to be in. It will be the task of the committee to delve as honestly and as openly as it possibly can into what can be, and I think in most cases is, an incredibly emotional area for the people involved. I think it is incumbent upon all members of the committee to do everything in our power to make sure that we look at this subject with that very much in our mind.
I notice that the reporting date is June. I think that should be adequate, given the Social Policy Committee's load at the moment. I look forward to the first six months of next year being spent very fruitfully conducting this very worthwhile inquiry.
MR BERRY (Minister for Health, Minister for Industrial Relations and Minister for Sport) (11.32): I would like to congratulate Ms Szuty and Ms Ellis for a very sensible response to the introductory speech by Mrs Carnell on this matter, but I cannot offer the same congratulations to Mrs Carnell. I certainly support this inquiry; I think it is a good thing. But I will not sit idly by and listen quietly to veiled criticism of our childhood health and development service. My view is that there was a bit - - -
Mrs Carnell: Is it not okay for the parents to say what they think?
MR BERRY: It is fine for them to have their say. This inquiry is a sensible approach to an issue out there in the community, and I certainly do support the inquiry. Mrs Carnell posed a veiled criticism about our early intervention service, and I will just summarise a few things about it to get them on the record. First, I agree with the inquiry. I think it is a sensible way to go. I do not take a position to anticipate the outcome of the inquiry, but I will put a few other facts on the record, which you will be interested in, I am sure.
Our intervention service, which is the Child Health and Development Service - CHADS, as it is described - is readily accessible and there is no waiting time. It is the sole early intervention service in the ACT, and professionals there argue that delays would be counterproductive. All therapies are offered flexibly on the basis of assessed clinical need - there are clinicians who make these judgments - and the frequency of appointments varies from weekly, fortnightly, monthly and so on. They are all assessed on the basis of clinical need. I am sure that during your inquiry you will get submissions which will expound on those sorts of things. Weekly appointments for short periods may be to work on a particular skill or be pre- or post-operative. Urgent requests are also met by all areas, according to the advice I have from the service.
There are approximately 480 children attending the service. Outcome measures from their initial family and team assessments are documented. Further, 83 per cent of the goals set were fully met in 1992-93. Family team discussions are held at a later stage. There are a small number of parents whose children have particular or severe disabilities who are dissatisfied with the service and choose other options because they have developed a view about them, for one reason or another. I am not going to be critical of those parents. That is a judgment they are entitled to exercise.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .