Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 2 Hansard (11 March) . . Page.. 632 ..
MR WOOD (continuing):
That was said by the director. Many more people were going to their doors. Many more people were in need. This document needed to reflect that situation. Do we have now a theme coming through here that signals a budget that will hit those who can least afford it? Last year's budget, last year's caring budget, put rents up for people in ACT Housing properties - those who can least afford it. Last year's budget made it harder for people with old vehicles who cannot afford something a bit newer by increasing registrations. What might we see in this year's budget? I wonder if the claim for it will be "a caring budget".
I want to acknowledge that the Government, encouraged by ACTCOSS, is undertaking a poverty inquiry. I think that is good and proper, and we will all be very interested to see the outcomes of that. But let us see that concern expressed in this debate on this motion and in the budget that we are talking about. What about people with disabilities who I think need more and more, not less? They face very significant hardships, and those who care for them face significant hardships.
Ms Carnell: I actually said that in my speech and I actually said how much money should go to them.
MR WOOD: Let me indicate just one example, and I am pleased that the Chief Minister will want to pick it up. Exiting from Koomarri in the next few years will be quite a number of students. At this stage most of their parents cannot see where they will be going. They need to know and we need to provide the programs for those students as they move into adulthood and into the need for further care. We expect to see something happening with that.
I can go through a whole list of areas, such as dental health services. I think we need more rather than less to overcome the problem when the Commonwealth removed its interests. What about alcohol services? I will leave drugs aside because that is a whole debate on its own. There are people exiting the alcohol services we have here that are very good, though not enough, and yet they are reverting to their poor behaviour in terms of consumption of alcohol. They are dying because they are leaving after short-term attention at some places and going out into the community without support. What about counselling services for all sorts of groups of people, such as families in crisis? They are finding it difficult to get the advice, help and support they need. Respite services remain the most critical issue, I think, in this town. The committee I chair is about to look in detail at that.
These are some of the needs that we have, and around all that we have to look at the infrastructure for these services, the community support for them and the ability of the community to support them. There is a vast amount there that has to be attended to, and these are some of the things that have to be factored into the budget. Notwithstanding the difficulties and putting aside all the rhetoric, these are some of the matters we have to attend to. I want to put that firmly on the record today.
When the opportunity arises, as we deal with matters arising from this debate, I now foreshadow that I will move a further amendment which will read:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .