Page 2734 - Week 09 - Thursday, 25 August 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
the criminal justice system and what we were actually going to do with the people who ended up in front of this tribunal. In many circumstances, the answer was, "We are not sure, because there simply is not adequate money in the system". The Government will probably attempt to say that we should spend more, spend less, or whatever. I think we all agree that we do not spend enough money on mental health in the ACT or, for that matter, anywhere else in Australia. It is unfortunate that spending in the ACT has traditionally - - -
Mr Berry: We spend more in the community than anybody else.
MRS CARNELL: No, we do not, actually. We spend less than anybody else, Mr Berry. Unfortunately, you are a little bit wrong; so just be quiet.
Mr Connolly: In community mental health we do; but globally - - -
MRS CARNELL: On mental health generally, we spend some 40 per cent less than some other States do.
Mr Berry: It is the old slogan again. You have to look at the big picture.
MRS CARNELL: If we look at the big picture, Mr Berry, we find that we spend 40 per cent less than most other States do.
Mr Berry: Yes; but we are more advanced than other States in many respects.
MRS CARNELL: I do not think you should get into that debate. You can only lose it.
Mr Berry: No; you will lose.
MRS CARNELL: Mr Berry, I think that, on this issue, everybody - except you, obviously - would agree that we do not resource adequately any area of mental health in the ACT or anywhere else. The Burdekin report made that very clear. One of the real concerns of the Social Policy Committee and of the Liberal Party - and, I thought, of the Labor Party as well - was that, as this Bill is brought into law, as an Assembly, we should ensure that people do not fall through the cracks and that there is adequate resourcing to pick up those people and to do what we can for them, as a community.
One of the things that we understand - certainly the Social Policy Committee did, and I thought that the Labor Party did as well - and that I am sure Mr Connolly understands, is that those needs vary from health needs, through to housing needs, through to social welfare needs. They are not simply in one area. That is the reason why we believe that the guardianship approach and the extensions that have happened in that area are very appropriate. We must look at case managers in this area. It is the only way to go. Every case is unique, and that is the problem in the area. Certainly, the Liberal Party totally supports that approach.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .