Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 10 Hansard (4 September) . . Page.. 3054 ..

MRS CARNELL: Thank you very much. Obviously, it is communicated very efficiently, because the people involved are getting their disinfectant from central stores, as you rightly said. The policy for the disability program is quite clear on the fact that supplies of such things as protective gloves, detergent, disposable paper towelling for hand washing and so on are provided. The sorts of things that you would need for special purposes outside normal living are provided by central stores. Remember that this is a residential facility, not a hospital.

I think the thing that seems to be misunderstood horribly, certainly by you, Ms Tucker, is that these are people's houses. You seem to believe that it is appropriate for people in their own homes to be putting on gloves and masks and aprons every time somebody cuts a finger or whatever. I do not believe that is appropriate. I think proper techniques, proper approaches to blood, and other sensible approaches, shall we say, to looking after people are appropriate in a residential facility. I do not believe that we should treat people in our residential accommodation for people with disabilities as somehow different from normal people. There should not be a clinical model. There must be a residential model. If we move in any other direction we are moving absolutely at odds with our whole direction with regard to accommodation for people with disabilities. Yes, there does need to be proper technique. You have a full copy of the manuals that are in all of the homes and which tell you about such things as how to handle normal situations that may occur in these sorts of houses. That is an appropriate approach.

I believe that houses for people with disabilities are very efficiently run. I believe that we have staff that are extraordinarily caring. I believe that we have a lot of very happy people in our supported accommodation. Yes, we have one or two problems. You will always expect that. The reality, the bottom line, is that we do have probably one of the best programs. It was run by those opposite as well. I expect that it is one of the best programs in Australia for people with disabilities. They live in a residential environment and are being treated like anybody else in our community; they are not being treated under a clinical model. They are being treated as people who have the same sorts of rights as anybody else.

MS TUCKER: I ask you to answer the question. I have obviously acknowledged the difference between a hospital and a house. I think I might understand it better than you do, Mrs Carnell. My question is this: What is the assessment procedure for the welfare of clients and staff to identify where you need more protection to prevent infection? If you read your own policies you will see that your own department has acknowledged the need for this, but we need a clear understanding of what your assessment process is as to whether or not a house has high needs and can therefore purchase prevention of infection equipment out of central stores and not pay for it out of food money, because the food money is not adequate.

MRS CARNELL: As I said the last time you asked the question, it is done on a house-by-house basis because it is the only way you can do it. People's needs change at different times. Under normal circumstances a particular amount of normal, extra products is available from central stores. If extra equipment is needed for special purposes an assessment is done of that house. The manager of that house asks that an assessment be made. An assessment is made and it is determined whether that house has

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .