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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 5 Hansard (7 May) . . Page.. 1205 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

proper conduct of disability services. Given the reluctance of the Liberal Party to embark on the report initially, at least in this form, and the enthusiasm of the Labor Party of the time, there is I think some irony in the present position being taken by each of the major parties with respect to this report, and how it should be dealt with from this point on.

After there being several extensions of time and some modification to the terms of reference, the board reported in December of last year-as I have said, a year after the report was originally commissioned-having cost something in the order of $1 million. Given the length of time and the number of issues covered by the report, that delay and that cost is hardly surprising.

The board's findings and its recommendations fall into two essential categories: one was a series of findings and recommendations about the model of service provision for those with disabilities in the ACT, and the second was a series of findings and recommendations about individuals, particularly in senior administrative positions in disability services. I want to cover each of those issues in turn.

First of all, Mr Speaker, the question of the model of service provision is extensively dealt with in the report. The report finds that ACT Disability Services are inflexible, that they have inappropriate performance measures, that they are insufficiently concerned with the question of client choice within disability programs, that they are resistant to clients', and particularly clients' families', participation in the provision of services, that they have an outmoded model of service delivery in the territory, that events and developments in other states have overtaken the provision of disability services and that ACT services should be adjusted to reflect contemporary practice.

The report argues that the system is designed to suit the service provider, rather than the client of the service. It argues that the focus on the delivery of group housing, in particular, is a mistake. It says that this is, and I quote, a "one size fits all" approach to service provision, that the approach has changed in other jurisdictions, and that it should also change in the ACT.

It emphasises that what it calls a person-centred approach should be adopted, one that empowers the clients to decide what is best for them and, as a result of changes to the framework arrangements, ensures that there is the financial capacity to carry through with the chosen service. To reinforce that new model, the report suggests that a new body should be created to oversee the provision of services and the monitoring of service delivery across the territory, both in government and non-government sectors. This body might be called the ACT Disability Services Commission.

The report suggests that adopting the model used in Western Australia is the best approach to take. Recommendations include that the new commission should gradually withdraw substantially from the use of group housing in the ACT. It argues that this is a model that does not suit most clients of the service at the present time. It also argues that, gradually, a person-centred approach should be replace it, so that the emphasis on the choices made by individuals and their families should be apparent in the way in which those services are provided.

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