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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 11 Hansard (24 September) . . Page.. 3153 ..

MR STANHOPE (Chief Minister, Attorney-General, Minister for Health, Minister for Community Affairs and Minister for Women) (10.51), in reply: Mr Speaker, again, I thank members for rising and supporting this bill. As Mr Stefaniak indicated, it is a quite obvious gap in the legislation that a person who is subjected to a Mental Health Tribunal order, and who has a right of appeal to the Supreme Court about that order, does not have a right to have the tribunal decision stayed until the appeal before the Supreme Court has been heard.

It is a quite obvious gap in the arrangements that pertain to the treatment of people under the Mental Health (Treatment and Care) Act, and of course it flies in the face of any orderly appeal process-the sort of process that of course applies in a whole range of areas and a range of instances across the board where people are subjected to decisions that potentially impact on them.

Of course, the irony in relation to this particular provision is that a person might be subjected to a treatment regime as a result of a Mental Health Tribunal order-for instance, as has been mentioned, convulsive therapy treatment, which could be very physically invasive and could cause very significant distress-in circumstances where the person is appealing that particular order.

The fact that the legislation as it currently stands allows the possibility that a person subjected to such an order and granted a right of appeal does not have an opportunity to have the treatment stayed until after the appeal is heard really is a very significant breach of rights-and, of course, it essentially renders the appeal process quite meaningless.

So this amendment to the Mental Health (Treatment and Care) Act simply responds to what is a quite glaring difficulty with the appeal process that applies to individuals who have been subjected to certain treatment orders which they wish to question and appeal.

It is a minor amendment, but we always need to be very mindful of any provisions that we make in relation to people with mental issues. It is an important piece of legislation. Although it is minor, it is extremely important because it goes to the protection of a fundamental principle-that everybody has a right of appeal against any decision which potentially impacts on them and on their rights. And, of course, a fundamental right of all of us is not to be subjected to any form of treatment, or to any action, to which we object.

I thank members for their support of this particular amendment. It is a tidying-up amendment. It is very important-not particularly significant in itself but potentially very significant to a range of people. I commend the bill.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill agreed to in principle.

Leave granted to dispense with detail stage.

Bill agreed to.

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