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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 12 Hansard (12 November) . . Page.. 4047 ..

MS REILLY (continuing):

They looked at the philosophical premise of the models that were available, the extent and frequency of services, gaps, the degree to which the provision of services was integrated and coordinated and the desirability of incorporating conductive education into the range of early intervention services available to children.

The report was followed by a draft discussion paper on early intervention services in the ACT that was issued in December 1994. This resulted in the early intervention policy delivered in August 1996.

Mrs Carnell: By me. There was a big gap.

MS REILLY: There was. It took you nearly two years to get that together.

Mrs Carnell: We were not actually in power; it was you guys.

MS REILLY: You may note, Mrs Carnell, since you have pointed this out for us all, that this paper for discussion was actually issued in December 1994, within six months of the standing committee reporting. It took you nearly two years after you came into power, which I might remind you was in February 1995, to develop the policy. The report was actually progressed, Mrs Carnell, but it took you two years to develop your policy.

I am putting up a proposal to look at enhancing the services that are available, but already the Government is defensive. You have to ask why. The policy that Mrs Carnell has brought to our attention - I am not saying there is anything wrong with it - sets out the principles under which the policy is set out. It says:

The policy aims to provide a framework for coordinated and easily accessible services for all children and their families in the target population with physical, intellectual, emotional and social needs as well as those children at risk of neglect or abuse.

There is no dispute about the statement of principles. We are not disputing what the early intervention program is at the moment. I am proposing that a type of early intervention therapy program which is not currently available in the ACT should be examined. I am not saying that it should be implemented, Mrs Carnell. It should be examined to see whether such a therapy program would be beneficial and extend the range of services which are available to ACT children and their families who require such services.

I was hoping that we would not get a defensive response. We are not suggesting that there is something wrong with the services currently available. We are talking about enhancing those services. As I am sure members are aware, reading and research indicate that early intervention therapies give the best result for those who require therapy. You can see the changes in practice by looking at what happens now. Tests are done as soon as children are born to determine whether there are any disabilities. This allows therapy to be started as soon as possible. I am quite sure that this is something that none of us would disagree with.

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