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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 12 Hansard (5 December) . . Page.. 3646 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

capacity of some persons to participate. That was seen to be very important by the community. These terms of reference came from the community.

Mr Moore: A particular group within the community.

MS TUCKER: Unlike Mr Moore, it is of interest to me. I might as well get it on the public record as well that on one occasion Mr Moore did say, and I have seen a transcript of it, that after he had suggested that the Community Advocate or the Community and Health Services Complaints Commissioner could conduct this inquiry I had slipped it into the terms of reference that the complaints mechanisms be looked at. That was absolutely unfair and I would welcome an apology from Mr Moore on that. What is true is that the community were saying consistently well before this discussion started that they were concerned about how complaints were managed. This came up in my previous inquiry. It has come through loud and clear over the years since. This was the result of the community's feelings about what needed to be looked at in any broad inquiry.

What we have here is an interesting addition. Advocacy services have now been added to the terms of reference. The relevant section used to say, "Consumer protection, complaints and appeals, particularly the adequacy and effectiveness of consumer protection." I would have thought that in anyone's thinking that would have included the broad spectrum of services and systems in place, but Mr Moore and this government have chosen to add, quite specifically, advocacy services. Later on there is a reference to the Community and Health Services Complaints Commissioner and the Community Advocate and there is the addition of "consumer advocacy".

Is it not interesting that we have a suggestion from the minister that this is just about a few troublemakers? If Mr Moore has said that once, he has said it many times. He has suggested that the advocacy groups are causing a problem. What fascinates me about that is that decisions are made on a policy level and at the other end we have the advocacy agencies which are working with the human beings involved, whether they be the people with mental illness who are being chucked out of Hennessy House at the moment or whether they be the people with a disability.

The advocacy agencies on the ground are the ones which have personal relationships with the people who are feeling the impact of this government's policies, and they speak on behalf of their clients. Mr Moore calls them troublemakers. Mr Moore has added them to the terms of reference and removed the clause that said that this inquiry would be undertaken in a way which was sure to protect individual interests. An interesting combination of changes has been made by Mr Moore.

The last point is the reporting date, which has been changed back to 31 May. Those in the field believe that 15 August was the bare minimum it would take to do a proper and thorough investigation, but Mr Moore knows better for his own reasons.

MR WOOD (3.47): Mr Speaker, I share some of Ms Tucker's concerns, but let me deal first with the somewhat pious attitude of Mr Moore in saying, "How dare the Labor Party and others support such a drastic change to the relationship between the executive and the legislature."

Mr Moore: That is Mr Rugendyke's legislation.

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