Page 3603 - Week 08 - Friday, 24 August 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I know they want to be involved so I hope that we actually see them being involved in this review of the operation of FirstPoint. They have raised a number of concerns about the operation of FirstPoint, including that—and this was addressed in estimates—the service is not available seven days a week and 24 hours a day. They have also raised issues around referral processes. I think these concerns need to be sorted if we want this service to work as it should.
The Greens were pleased to see funding allocated towards the design of the common ground model. We believe this is a development that should be supported. It has been successful in other jurisdictions. It is a partnership between the community, private and government sectors. It is the type of housing partnerships that can lead to extremely beneficial outcomes, as this model has in other states.
While I know it is not in the budget, I am going to talk about safe shelter. We had a motion in the Assembly on Wednesday which all parties unanimously agreed to. There has been an article in the paper today that is a little concerning. The points I would make again, as I did in my speech, are that I know the directorate do not see this as fitting into what seems to be their model, or continuum, of housing. But it is a legitimate service. It operates in other states and cities.
As I said in my speech, it is not an admission of defeat on homelessness. It is actually recognising that this is part of the picture, part of the services that can provide accommodation for people. Everyone recognises it is not a permanent solution. Through talking to people involved with the early morning centre, St John’s Care—all of those sorts of organisations—and through my own experience in working in mental health, often the reality of the situation is that people are not ready to go into permanent accommodation, and providing people with shelter at night, somewhere that is warm and safe, is a starting point.
We have to recognise that we do have rough sleepers in the ACT. Sleeping out in the open in the cold weather is not a safe situation. It can severely hamper people’s health and wellbeing. What I find quite frustrating is that these groups have not asked for government funding. They have actually done the right thing. They have come forward saying, “We want to do this.” They have gone to the government saying, “What are the things we have to do to make this work?”
It seems to me now that the primary impediment is the actual building code. I have been to one of the halls and, again, as I noted in my speech, they have smoke detectors. I understand there may be an issue with the wiring there, but they are willing to fix that. There is emergency lighting and there are fire exits. Those things are actually in place. (Second speaking period taken.)
If there are any problems with this now, we need to point out what they are and allow the group to fix them. Then it goes to the registrar and can be sorted. If the directorate and the government do not agree with this proposal, that is fine. But a group has come forward willing to do something. Over the years there have been a number of services that groups in the community have gone ahead and done without the support of government which have then become an integral part of service delivery. There are many examples of that.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video