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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 12 Hansard (12 November) . . Page.. 4053 ..

MR WOOD (continuing):

Under the new Government, I have to say, I think they have a room somewhere, or had one while they were continuing. Congratulations to the Government for that, because it did not occur in my time. That was, in part, because of the background briefings I was getting. There seemed to me to be some sort of concern on the part of our professionals about the work of people they saw as non-professionals. That is just one example. I remember back to my own time as a teacher, when a very significant part of my teaching experience was with children with special needs. That reinforced in the early stage of my life the need for coordination of services.

I think this motion has great validity. Mr Stefaniak would not stand up and say, "We deliver everything to the ultimate possible degree". Mr Stefaniak would say, "We can improve on what we do". Let us see whether we can do that by putting this motion into practice. I heard what Mr Moore said. I would regard that as a fall-back position, a second choice, for me if the first choice does not get up. That is the one I am supporting today.

MRS CARNELL (Chief Minister) (5.04): Mr Speaker, I seek leave to move a motion under standing order 216 for the referral of this motion to the Standing Committee on Social Policy.

Leave granted.

MRS CARNELL: I move:

That the motion be referred to the Standing Committee on Social Policy.

Let me speak to that for a moment. Mr Speaker, Mr Stefaniak has already indicated that the department has had a look at this issue, has been down to look at the centre, and has spoken to various people; so a lot of the work has already been done. The department has determined that the service does not value add sufficiently to the services already being provided. That information has been provided in the speeches today. Mr Stefaniak also indicated that the service was a good service but that the department had determined a particular outcome. I would suggest that the best way to look at a situation like this is to refer it to the Social Policy Committee and get it to look at the information, the data, and speak to the department, as they have already done some work on it, and allow the Social Policy Committee to provide a brief report to this Assembly. Alternatively, if they believe that this requires a significant amount of work to be done, they could suggest it go to a Social Policy Committee in the future.

I do not believe that it is appropriate to have another study if we have already had one, but I think it is appropriate that this Assembly have an opportunity to look at the work that the department has already done. The information that Marion Reilly put on the table today did not tell us a lot about the service. It is very hard to vote for having a look at a service that we know very little about, apart from the fact that it is an integrated service. We have lots of integrated services around. I think it is appropriate that we allow the committee system to look at what is on the table now and determine whether further work needs to be done. That is why I moved the motion.

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