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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 8 Hansard (27 June) . . Page.. 2363 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

There are some positive indicators to begin with, but there are areas of concern. For instance, the Magistrates Court, which also conducts coronial inquests, does not anticipate an improved throughput this year. There has been a number of well-publicised and tragic deaths among the disability and mental health communities, but the coronial inquests look like taking years. When we are dealing with people so vulnerable and shaken by death, the onus must be on government to ensure that the causes of such tragedies are addressed promptly and the people concerned are treated with consideration and respect. A process that goes on for years like these ones do would surely undermine any trust or hope for new beginnings, would not be useful to help with closure and would reinforce the feeling that all parties are under siege. I notice also that there does not seem to be much of an investment in advocacy and support for these people, their families and friends, and I am concerned about that. Maybe that is covered somewhere in the budget and I just have not been able to find it yet, but it is a clear unmet need.

We do not have the full picture on education spending yet. The government has kept faith with its most basic commitments, building on the previous government's class size reductions and staff pay rises, the indexation increase, while the reviews into vocational education, counselling and education funding were expected. The government has, however, kept back some millions of the free bus money until these reviews have been completed. We will be looking for evidence that the education department is committed to supporting innovation, creativity and excellence in schooling and developing programs which provide the opportunities and support for young people who need them.

The youth sector, however, appears to have remained the poor relation here. The reorganisation of the ACT public service seems to have fragmented rather than consolidated youth services, leading me to doubt that the expertise available can be harnessed in a coordinated way. There are, of course, a number of programs that appear to target recognised need. The support and recreation programs for North and West Belconnen and the young people they hope to work with might rue the loss of a skate park and tennis courts, while young people in Gungahlin probably will be old before they see a pool or a park. If the ACT government escapes the clutches of the V8 supercars, perhaps it can put some of that money back into these proposed facilities.

The community sector, those non-government service organisations on which we depend to deliver a growing proportion of our services, appear to be most left behind. While people are relieved to see provision in the budget for community sector organisations to pay for increases under the SACS award, there are two points that need to be made here. If it is prudent for government to make provision for expected pay rises for its own employees, it is also prudent to plan ahead for expected pay rises for government-funded community services. It should not be necessary for the sector to have to run a campaign for increased funds every time the award wage is increased.

More subtle perhaps is the new meaning of the SACS award. This award is part of Mr Howard's industrial relations plan. It offers a minimal safety net. It is not a guide for reasonable payment, although I acknowledge that the industrial process to this end is not yet complete. So the terms of the review of the SACS award, for example, did not allow the comparative work in the public sector to be taken into account, nor did it allow the particular wage market in the ACT to be taken into account.

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