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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 11 Hansard (26 September) . . Page.. 3483 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

Turning now to public transport, the Government has made quite a lot of the importance of providing transport infrastructure in this budget, but bus services in this town are getting few and far between. The Greens welcome any genuine proposal to make public transport more flexible, but the cuts to ACTION's budget over the past year have only reduced bus services all over Canberra. The sale of the fleet has taken place without any attempt by the Government to prove the economic benefits to the Assembly or to the people of Canberra, and it is, in fact, just a first step down the path to its privatisation of the whole public transport system. First, it will be privately-owned buses; then the maintenance of the buses could be contracted out; then individual routes could be put out for tender; and, before we know it, the whole service will be up for the highest bidder. The decision to sell the bus fleet makes a mockery of the promise by Mrs Carnell last year that buses would stay in public ownership, even though she claims now that she meant ACTION not buses.

I would be very interested to know how the Government has worked out its community service obligations for ACTION, why there appears to be no environment CSO, and why the pricing and general route off-peak CSOs have been reduced. The Government obviously has an underlying belief that public transport should be run commercially and that government funding is a subsidy rather than legitimate government expenditure, and, in fact, an investment, not a subsidy. Public transport is an investment which will produce social and environmental returns.

As far as social policy is concerned, I think it is fair to say that equity is not one of the key factors underlying this budget. It is particularly concerning that little attempt has been made to take up the slack where Commonwealth programs have been cut in the ACT in a range of community services, ranging from child care and labour market programs, as I have mentioned, to dental services. The Social Policy Committee is presently grappling with a number of big issues - mental health and disabilities, and violence in schools - and there are no easy answers, that is for sure. What we do know is that the cost to our community, including the financial costs, of not taking preventative action is huge. That is why I am quite appalled that Mrs Carnell is boasting about the new expenditure on mental health.

The budget allocation of $45,000 to the Belconnen Remand Centre is a joke and misses the real point. Provision of a secure psychiatric unit for people with mental illness is critical. It has been stated over and over again, not only by people in the mental health community but also by magistrates. It is totally inappropriate that people with a mental illness who have allegedly committed minor crimes are put in the Belconnen Remand Centre or in Quamby. This was a problem for former governments as well, but it is time something was done.

Many people have spoken out publicly in recent weeks about the critical shortage of support for people with mental illness, and the ACT is underfunded in this area. Last year's Estimates Committee was also very concerned about underresourcing in mental health. While the increased funding for supported accommodation of $150,000 is welcome, we still have many unmet needs to address. These include services for specific target groups, including women, children, adolescents and people who have mental illness but are also substance abusers, and other dual diagnosis patients.

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