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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 6 Hansard (17 June) . . Page.. 1708 ..

MR BERRY (continuing):

It is therefore of deep concern to me to hear that the service is being curtailed and the Smooth Speech course will no longer be available to persons over the age of 18. Does someone within the Department of Education believe that people over the age of 18 do not stutter?

I can only imagine that you believe so strongly in "User Pays" that you have forgotten, or never appreciated, the social and economic cost of stuttering to our community. On the one hand, people may be limited in their social contact as they feel that their speech is a source of embarrassment. On the other hand is the question of unfulfilled potential. A person who is limited, or who self limits, due to speech impediment, may well fail to reach their full potential within the workforce.

Although I fully support the concept of "User Pays", I find it hard to reconcile your Government's decision to curtail Speech Therapy (for those over 18) whilst at the same time seeing fit to spend in excess of $20 million on upgrading Bruce Stadium; a sports facility primarily for elite professional athletes and therefore of little direct benefit to the community. I wonder if the ballot box has any bearing on such decisions?

In short, I would like to know how the Government can reconcile both their duty of care to the community and the reduction in Speech pathology services to adults. Indeed I am particularly concerned at the obvious discrimination against adult stutterers; is there an Access and Equity issue lurking in here somewhere?

For my part, I find it extremely difficult to reconcile my continued support of your Government with the short-sightedness of this policy.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

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