Page 1594 - Week 06 - Thursday, 7 June 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
It is worth noting that the status of the domestic violence assistance manual is no longer clear. The previous budget suggested that a domestic violence manual was being prepared, but no reference to it was made in this year’s budget. Such a document would be warmly welcomed, and I sincerely hope that the project has not been abandoned. As well as this, services available to women suffering domestic violence remain under resourced in this year’s budget, as they have been in previous years.
The budget papers indicate that $2.2 million will be allocated to victims of crime over four years. We welcome initiatives that support victims of crime, but we are concerned about the lack of clarity in this policy. I believe the money will go to the Victims of Crime Coordinator. Surely what we need are more long-term support services to victims of crime, particularly victims of violent crimes and sexual crimes. I have a number of questions. Where does the idea come from? Who was consulted about the needs of victims of crime?
There still appears to be a lack of investment in support services for those dealing with gambling and alcohol problems, and for the families of those people. Lifeline is still disgracefully under-funded. A set percentage of gambling revenue has to be directed to minimising the damaging effects of gambling. While I appreciate that the ACT government are trying to make what is seen by them as too small an amount of money to go a long way, the sector itself has ideas about the ways in which the money could be spent more efficiently. As we know, initiatives that relate to the most vulnerable members of society often cross departmental lines between transport, education, justice, health and countless others. An amalgamation of funding for some sectors that causally relate to each other, such as alcohol support and mental health, could be considered a way of stretching those finite resources more efficiently.
Funding and support for the community sector has not been resurrected from last year’s cuts. The ACT Greens were hoping to see a significant boost to community projects and initiatives with a focus on advocacy, empowerment, service delivery and primary initiatives. Investment in the already undervalued not-for-profit sector can save the government money. Unpaid carers, for instance, save the government millions of dollars annually. This work is done overwhelmingly by voluntary, or modestly paid, workers. The government has a responsibility to support the people who carry out this valuable work; furthermore, it has a responsibility to support the projects.
We all appreciate the difficult task facing the ACT government having to ameliorate the effects of the federal government’s increasingly ruthless policies on very vulnerable people. Problems with inconsistencies in indexation, coupled with WorkChoices, the welfare to work policy and various other federal initiatives continue to affect the ACT. The commonwealth government continues to embody the Margaret Thatcher perspective. I was interested to hear the Leader of the Opposition quote her; that is, that there is no society, only an economy. I trust that the ACT government are united in recognising that they must develop and implement social policy with this backdrop in mind.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .