Page 2229 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 23 June 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
ACT government agencies, work experience and social placements, and sexual health and education.
Although there have been scant or no details provided by the government regarding this tender process, both organisations are mindful that the stated service priorities might preclude perhaps one of them from qualifying in such a tender process. In addition, the mooted tender is now months overdue while the loss of funding is only days away. Yet the minister still ignores the plight of the parents and their children, as well as the organisations and the staff of these organisations, the fact that lives are to be severely disrupted through loss of jobs and income, and the effect on the health and the learning and development of these children. But this minister still refuses to discuss these issues with these individuals and communities.
The case to retain the Shepherd Centre and Noah’s Ark and the services they provide in the ACT is compelling. They complement the services currently available through Therapy ACT and the Department of Education and Training. They enable parents with children with special learning needs to have an opportunity to choose options that they feel are the best available for their children—children whose special needs require specialist attention.
This motion is about children and their parents. It is about ensuring their continued development and it is about giving the parents the necessary skills to facilitate this development. Take, for example, the Shepherd Centre. Without the requisite funding, families may have no choice but to seek the services of Therapy ACT, services which the minister tells us are available—what the minister is not aware of, or which he chooses not to tell us, is that these services are already way oversubscribed with a long waiting list—or department of education programs, which focus on a “teaching” perspective.
The ACT will lose a source of expertise in spoken language skills in deaf and hearing impaired children aged zero to five years old. Ironically, minister, if you allow this situation to play out to its conclusion, which is only days away, the Department of Education and Training will also lose a source of expertise to train its own staff. This minister still spins his lines without paying the courtesy of meeting with the management of these organisations or the parents of these children. Minister, what are you afraid of? Are you afraid of hearing the truth? These parents and organisations deserve the opportunity to show you the consequences of the decisions that have been taken. They deserve your urgent attention, to see the reason for the requirements for this support, and early intervention mechanisms for these parents in managing their children’s hearing loss.
The case for Noah’s Ark is equally compelling, and it is also without sufficient funding. As much as the government has led the public to believe that the Shepherd Centre’s services are similar to the government’s, they are not, as the following examples illustrate. The Shepherd Centre uses a multidisciplinary model involving therapists, audiologists and family support, while Therapy ACT focuses on speech therapy and the department of education uses a teacher of the deaf approach. The Shepherd Centre is family focused, while both Therapy ACT and the department of education are child centred. The Shepherd Centre is staffed with certified and trained
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video