Page 2587 - Week 08 - Thursday, 30 June 2005
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
modify that behaviour if they get the right sort of compassionate, informed guidance from people who are highly skilled and adequately resourced to spend time with them and work with them in their environment. This is expensive in the short term perhaps but it can pay dividends over the longer term.
Finally, on the issue of disability support services, I have stated previously and I will say it again that I do not accept the government’s estimate of how much it has spent on responding to the Gallop report. The breakdown of the estimated funding that was tabled with the estimates committee included funding spent on therapy services and transport, none of which were matters canvassed in the recommendations of the Gallop inquiry. I do not believe that the government has adequately responded to the Gallop report recommendations. There is more to be done and including spending on other areas of disability services is misleading.
MR SPEAKER: Order! The member’s time has expired. Would you like to proceed for another ten minutes?
DR FOSKEY: Yes. With regard to the community services portfolio, the new approach to community sector funding indexation, which will replace CPI indexation with an 80:20 wage cost/CPI indexation method that more accurately reflects real costs, is a step in the right direction, but it is an affront to the sector that this measure is being delayed for 12 months. The delay will cause considerable hardship for community organisations that have been waiting three to four years for this change in formula and are currently treading water.
I will also repeat my disappointment that the government has missed an opportunity to strengthen the viability of the community sector by responding to the community sector viability task force’s deliberations and failed to invest in the community sector’s infrastructure, including community facilities and information and communications technology.
I would like to talk a little bit about concessions. The government has provided additional funding in this budget for the concessions program. The minister told the estimates committee that concessions on, for example, energy, water and sewerage, and motor registration greatly assist lower income families and pensioners to make ends meet.
At 6.00 pm, in accordance with standing order 34, the debate was interrupted. The adjournment of the Assembly having been put and negatived, the debate was resumed.
DR FOSKEY: I agree with that, but I have long been of the view that limiting concessions to people who are income-support recipients through eligibility requirements based on pension cards contributes to poverty traps and fails to recognise that people living on comparable levels of low income but income that is derived from earnings or superannuation would equally benefit from access to concessions. The government has reviewed the concessions program but it has refused to release the report and does not appear to be willing to grapple with this issue, which would be an important step towards poverty alleviation.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .