Page 4149 - Week 13 - Tuesday, 15 November 2005
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
calculates that this reduction of time that people spend in hospital translates into savings of $7.3 million in hospitalisation costs.
I put a side note here to this speech that, if you think about this, it is not always about money. And as we have said, it is not about more money into the system but better outcomes for people. Often it is just about using the resources that we have within the system in a better and more practical way. As well, there are other costs that would otherwise be incurred and that would be saved through people being hospitalised and then released only to be re-admitted.
The Mental Health Council comments most favourably on this project. In a recent commentary, the CEO of the council said:
Sadly we have too few programs like this around Australia and we have virtually no independent evaluations. We have governments continuing to invest in the wrong thing, in acute hospital beds and buildings, as a response to the mental health crisis rather than on community based services.
It gets back to what Mrs Dunne was alluding to in terms of case management. Maybe we need to re-evaluate what case management means. There are some excellent people working in the field, and I do not want them to be despondent today when we talk about this. We all need to ensure that we keep this topic out in the public arena for public debate in order that we can improve our services always. None of us is beyond reproach in regard to this matter.
The Mental Health Council emphasises that, while these two projects show what can be achieved, much further work needs to be done. I note that the minister does say that, but I hope he is not thinking he can throw money at the problem and then walk away. We all have a responsibility in this place to be a part of the solution. In particular, other areas of government must be involved to ensure that the education, training and employment needs of people with mental illness are considered. It is possible to achieve good outcomes from developing appropriate community-based programs and services for people with mental illness. At the same time, these programs are one part of the overall approach to responding to mental health issues. Again, that is the key. I agree.
It is not a one-size-fits-all situation, but certainly the Liberal opposition are trying to put forward what we believe are constructive and helpful options which we hope the government is not too arrogant to take on board. After all, we are all here working to the same end, and that is to see a reduction in the number of people with mental illness just languishing in our communities somewhere, with people so committed to working in the sector that we are falling over each other and not dealing with the problem.
As has already been mentioned, there will continue to be a requirement for appropriate secure facilities in which relevant programs and services are provided to people with mental illness. Again, I have pleasure in supporting this MPI. It is not a means of always bashing the government up but it is a means of saying to this government, “Don’t be a government of delay; don’t wait for election sweeteners; get off your hands; listen with some sort of humility to what we are saying; and make sure we can implement good things and work together as an Assembly,” which is what people in the community expect us to do on such an important issue.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .