Page 2749 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 6 June 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Mrs Dunne did mention that the legislation also creates an official visitor for homeless people. This is a role which government has not had previously and not indicated that it would look into. Again, this is a role that exists in other jurisdictions. We are not proposing anything that has not been done before, that there has not been a need for, and we do see that there is a need for that here in the ACT.
I should have addressed this earlier but Mr Corbell said the official visitors did not support this. That is not what we have been told. We have been told the official visitors do support the current legislation. Mrs Dunne noted to me that that was the same feedback she had received. There were issues raised with the first draft, as I have already said, by some of the official visitors. That was with some of them, not all of them. Again, as I have pointed out, we made those changes in relation to the concerns that had been expressed to us.
I thank the Canberra Liberals for supporting this bill. Mrs Dunne did say that she had some concerns with the legislation. I would just note this has been out for consultation for quite a few months now and we did encourage both the government and the Canberra Liberals to come forward if they had any suggested changes or concerns. That is something that could have occurred. But we have gone through a very thorough consultation process on this with the official visitors, with the Public Advocate, with the Human Rights Commission, with consumers, with carers and with groups representing people with disability across the board. We did, as Mrs Dunne has said, have overwhelming support from the sector for this to occur.
The reason we are bringing this in, as I said, is that this is something that has been recommended for over a decade. It is a role we believe we need here in the ACT. We believe it is important that we are doing what other jurisdictions are doing in terms of where the official visitors sit. Again, it is something that has been called for from the sector. It is not making, which might be slightly different to what Mrs Dunne is saying, any accusations as such. It is something we believe we need here in the ACT. We need to be up to date with what other jurisdictions are doing and it is about that issue, as I have said, about the perception. Perception is important. It is important that the people whom the official visitor is there to oversee and to take complaints from have confidence in the system and how it works.
I should note, which I did not note before, that, from talking to the official visitors, the key reason to have them placed with the Public Advocate and to have that administrative support is that there is a collegiate model. That was one thing that was clear from all of them. Particularly in relation to even the exposure draft, they often did feel that they were quite alone in the roles that they had, particularly those that were on their own. There are a number of mental health official visitors. They were able to offer that support. It was clear from all of them that this was something they were very much in favour of, which is why it has come about in the bill we have today.
Again, as I said, I am somewhat frustrated with what I have heard from the government today—and it is a shame that we were not able to come to agreement on it—but I do thank the Canberra Liberals for supporting the bill. I believe this is an important bill for the ACT, particularly for vulnerable people in the ACT.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video