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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 11 Hansard (29 November) . . Page.. 3393 ..

Mr Moore: I was trying to find a compromise, and consult and work with people.

MR WOOD: I think you do not understand the intention of the Assembly. We heard again the concerns expressed from the office of the coroner. We heard the concerns of the minister and others. But the members present, with the support of other members in the Assembly, have the clear expectation that the inquiry we propose can proceed without causing trouble or interfering with the coroner's inquiry.

Mr Moore: That is crap. That is the opposite to what he said. You know that.

MR WOOD: Yes, I know what the coroner said and I know what we expect. We are confident that, as has happened in other places, it can proceed without causing disruption. This inquiry is wide ranging and in particular there is a very significant difference in the way that submissions will be received. There will be a very wide range of submissions to this inquiry from organisations and from individuals who would not normally be sent to a coroner's inquiry. That would not normally be the case.

We need that avenue for people to express their views. The person who should carry out the inquiry is experienced: he knows the law, he knows the circumstances. That experience will help make this a very sensible inquiry that does not intrude into the coroner's area. We heard those concerns, but I have the expectation that we can deal with this.

I would suggest to the government that they can set up this inquiry perhaps after their cabinet meeting on Monday. If you do not accept this motion then-as I was pleased to hear Mr Moore say-if Mr Rugendyke's amendment is carried, as I expect it would be, the inquiry would be established. On that basis, let's not lose another week, let's take it to cabinet on Monday and get it moving. It is going to happen, it is going to be a broad and sensible and proper inquiry that we all need.

MR SPEAKER: Would you mind formally moving the motion?

MR WOOD: I move the motion circulated in my name, concerning an inquiry into disability services:

That this Assembly, noting the resolution of the Assembly of 18 October 2000 calling on the Government to appoint a Board of Inquiry pursuant to the Inquiries Act 1991 into the services for people with a disability in residential care in the ACT within 21 days and the failure of the Government to appoint the Board:

(1) directs the Government to appoint a Board of Inquiry, pursuant to the Inquiries Act 1991 (the Act), within 21 days, to inquire, in a manner which recognises the limited capacity of some persons to participate and protects individual interests, into the services for people with a disability in residential care in the ACT and in particular to examine:

(a) service quality, particularly the safety, dignity, wellbeing and development opportunities for people who reside in disability services provided or funded by the ACT Government (directly or indirectly) including, but not limited to:

(i) the degree of compliance with legislative requirements and disability standards;

(ii) the degree of participation by residents, families, carers, advocates and guardians in decisions affecting them or the persons for whom they care; and

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