Page 2393 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 12 August 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
This means that there will be, again, disruption for these children. Not only will they start in a new program, but potentially—definitely by the sound of that language—they will have the cloud of uncertainty hanging over them as they face yet another potential move to another premise at some point in the future. Again, it is taking children away from familiar surroundings and forcing parents to build new networks and new communities.
The success of early intervention is no secret, particularly when dealing with children with disabilities or developmental delays such as autism or global developmental delay. There is a finite time for these services and these opportunities to be given to give these kids the best start in life. At the end of the day, it ultimately changes their capacity as an adult to function in our community. A child that has a successful opportunity to go through an early intervention program is more likely to be independent as an adult and is more likely to be able to enter into gainful employment and contribute to our economy. The uncertainty that these changes pose to families is potentially robbing children of achieving to the maximum of their capacity.
We here are all familiar with the motions and the election commitments by the Canberra Liberals in 2012 to establish a centre based on the AEIOU philosophy. My colleague Mr Doszpot has been a very proud advocate of this. He and I have visited that organisation on a number of occasions. We are in regular communication and dialogue with them. After having a chat to the director up in Queensland just a couple of weeks ago, it is surprising to now see that they are considering establishing in the ACT. It is surprising, because that is quite to the contrary of what was explained to me on the telephone when I spoke to them just a couple of weeks ago. Nonetheless, hopefully, for the Canberra families, these kinds of services will come.
Members interjecting—
MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER: Mr Doszpot! Ms Burch! We are not having a conversation across the chamber. Mr Wall, continue.
MR WALL: Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. As I said, it is surprising that the opposition has been told one thing by a service provider and the government is promoting a different cause. AEIOU is just one such example.
Another issue that it is important to note in the debate tonight is the report that was commissioned by KPMG. KPMG were engaged to undertake what the government describes as market soundings. If you commission a report for an organisation such as KPMG to do some market soundings to find out what stage the service providers are at and whether or not they are ready and capable to establish services in the ACT, it is very good and it is a very sound principle, but you have taken this advice and sought the community consultation after the decision was already made, again, putting the cart before the horse. It is only going to continue to create more anxiety, more uncertainty and more unrest for families that are continuing to rely on these services, not yet knowing whether they are going to be able to access early intervention services for their child next year.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video