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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 07 Hansard (Tuesday, 29 June 2004) . . Page.. 2909 ..

some good initiatives: now where’s the plan?” I had to smile because I am rather surprised that this is one of the few areas where the government does not have a plan.

At 5.00 pm in accordance with standing order 34, the debate was interrupted. The motion for the adjournment of the Assembly having been put and negatived, the debate was resumed.

MRS BURKE: While we welcome that, it is disappointing to note, by their absence, funding and a strategic plan for men’s issues. A couple of members of the committee raised that in the Estimates Committee report. A strategic plan for men’s issues in this budget is sadly lacking, and there are significant issues for men in our community: men as fathers, men as heads of families, single fathers and increasing suicide rates.

We do not hear much from this government about the issues of men, and that rather disappoints me. I hope that in the not too distant future some attention will be given to them. Indicative of the level of commitment of this government to men’s matters is its pooh-poohing of any attempts by the Liberal opposition, or me, to raise the issue of the plight of men in our community, which is disappointing. Of course, I welcome the funding for the child and family centres and hope that the government continues the theme of the family when it considers its proposal for a commissioner for children.

I have already tabled my legislation for a children and family commissioner along similar lines to the Commissioner for Children in New Zealand, which is being kicked off with $28 million funding over four years for six commissioners in New Zealand. I note that it is a Labor government, which seems to be fully supportive and inclusive, but some comment was made by some person about the fact that just having the notion of a children’s commissioner sent the wrong message. What is in a word? We could all argue that one. But I hope the government considers some of the merits of my legislation and ensures that the family is fully included in any decisions made about children and that decisions are not made in isolation.

We look to the new units and the office of children and family support. Again, we see a cost of a million dollars. Perhaps we will be talking about that later on, but I just wanted to add it here, given that it is now under the wing of the Chief Minister’s Department. It would appear to me, and it is clear from the Vardon report, that this new unit—much like the people responsible for failing to report suspected cases of child abuse—has simply been moved sideways. It is more shuffling of the deckchairs.

I am concerned that this will do little, if anything, to change a particular culture that exists in this area, and that is the feedback that I get. We have again thrown a lot of money or done some sideways shuffling and moving—a big cost—when we could have isolated the work within the department without having to move fixtures and fittings. I have to ask why the new unit needed to be moved at all. We need to change the people and the culture, not simply move furniture.

I have a comment about the Community Inclusion Board—again, just over $8 million to be spent over four years—based on the South Australian model. I understand this has been a monumental failure in South Australia. When I did some research and got feedback on it, there were great and high hopes for this inclusion board—it was established amid much hype. There have been a few media opportunities, but very little

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