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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 1 Hansard (20 February) . . Page.. 280 ..

MR SPEAKER: I upheld the previous point of order - - -

Mr Berry: You are outrageous.

MR SPEAKER: Just a moment. I upheld the previous point of order because it was alleged that a Minister had threatened an organisation. However, I do not uphold this point of order, because Ms Reilly has expressed the concern of a community organisation. We have had discussions earlier today mentioning public servants and other figures, but we have not named them. Ms Reilly is not, therefore, breaching the convention that has been, to date, a feature of this debate. As long as you do not make comments like you did in the first case about Ministers threatening people, Ms Reilly, you will be all right. Be careful.

MS REILLY: I can understand the feelings of a number of community organisations in the ACT. But one of the problems occurs when people are uncomfortable and uncertain about their continued funding. (Extension of time granted) When there is an element of uncertainty and fear within the community organisation there is this silent protest and criticism. This allows changes - can I use that word? - to funding to happen without any - - -

Mrs Carnell: How do they happen?

MS REILLY: Of course, funding changes all the time. In any dynamic organisation, funding continues to change. If you continued to fund organisations in the same way you would not be doing your job, Mrs Carnell. This allows changes to funding to happen without criticism, without objection, without discussion. I think the ACT, as a community, is the poorer for this. The organisations I am talking about, organisations that are providing services, are often providing these services to the most vulnerable people in the ACT. It is important that the organisations that provide those services feel that they have the ability to act without fear and without concern about any problem they may have at any time. Intimidation and fear have generated much distress in the community sector. This reduces the effectiveness of organisations, particularly as advocates for their clients. I am concerned that this Government does not want to be fully informed about what is going on in the community sector.

There is another concern I would like to raise in relation to people being concerned about whether or not they can speak out. With the move to a purchaser-provider system of provision of community services, all organisations are competing for funding. The energy that could be channelled into positive actions and towards providing the best services gets channelled towards fighting off competition. This reduces cooperation and openness within the community sector. I think there will be a loss of creativity and innovation as a result.

There has also been a lot of discussion in this debate this afternoon about the large amount of consultation which this Government is undertaking. I would like to suggest that quantity does not necessarily equate with quality. I have received complaints about closed consultancies, where the decision has been made before it starts; where people are

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