Page 2237 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 23 June 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
It appears both of these organisations are in great danger of closing or restricting their services unless they have some certainty of funding into the future. There may be alternatives or better ways to deliver these services but longstanding organisations like the Shepherd Centre and Noah’s Ark need to be included in conversations on how the services they provide to their students and families can be maintained. As I understand it, the level of funding involved is not significant. It is approximately $125,000 per year for the Shepherd Centre and $107,000 per year for Noah’s Ark.
In supporting Mr Doszpot’s motion, the ACT Greens are asking the ACT government to meet or continue to meet with both organisations and assist them, if needed, to transition to any new arrangements that are applicable under any revised funding arrangements. The government needs to move quickly to complete the tender process and consider how best to maintain existing services until that process is finalised.
I note on 15 March this year Minister Barr wrote to Anthea Green, the chief executive officer of the Shepherd Centre, stating:
The department is currently developing a proposal around the provision of funding in the 2010-2011 financial year for non-government organisations providing programs for children and young people with a disability. Future funding will be aligned with the ACT Government policy and strategic requirements.
Again I note that the minister has touched on some of those issues this morning. It goes on to say:
The department will inform current recipients of targeted funding of the new arrangements as soon as the proposal is finalised.
As of last night, that is, three months after the letter was sent and one week before the end of the financial year, the Shepherd Centre has not been informed of new funding arrangements or any tender processes; so it can only conclude that the provision of funding in the 2010-11 financial year—that whole tender, the specifications, the tender process and so forth—has just not been finalised, although, as I note, this has obviously been going on over several months. And that is a question to the government as to why, when they have known that they are heading in this direction, when they knew that they were only giving six months funding to two organisations and had explained that they were moving to some new arrangements, that they had particular focus, it has taken this long to put together those tender documents. I also do not understand why these organisations have not been informed of some sort of timetable about when those tender documents will be released.
From my understanding of the procurement guidelines and procurement process, it is not a breach of that process of those guidelines to be informing organisations or the public about a timetable of when tendering processes will take place. Obviously, there are other things that would breach the guidelines but that is not one of them. So I am quite unclear why these organisations have simply not been told what the timetable is. And I think there is a need to explain what is the hold-up here.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video