Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

None . . Page.. 648 ..

MR CONNOLLY (3.43): The Opposition welcomes Mrs Carnell's statement in relation to this review, the report of which was circulated to members during the non-sitting period. This review was commissioned during the period of the Labor Government. As the Chief Minister indicated, it highlights the fact that this was an area that had become somewhat fragmented over the years. It also highlights - and I think it is very clear from the Chief Minister's statement - that this is a complex area which will require well thought out and well crafted solutions. I can recall from my experience as Health Minister that we were often attacked from the Opposition benches for failing to come up with magic wand solutions in relation to rehabilitation services. We were told that if the Liberal Party got into government, hey presto, magically, all would be solved. I am pleased that in fact we are now getting a much more balanced response.

The review is a welcome signpost for the future. It does not in itself solve the problems, as Mrs Carnell's statement indicates. The direction to which the Chief Minister points, of further work being done, of a cooperative approach being taken and of all parties - consumers and client groups as well as the relevant industrial organisations - being involved, is welcomed. I point out that the way this review was achieved, at comparatively modest cost and with the cooperation of all groups - industrial and consumer as well as management - is the way to go with reviews of health, rather than the 9½-week special.

Question resolved in the affirmative.


Health Services - Consultancy

MRS CARNELL: I would like to table a paper that has relevance to question time. It is the newsletter that went out to staff of the Department of Health and Community Care yesterday with regard to the consultancy that was announced yesterday. It seems that the Labor Party was unaware of it. It outlines the cost, the nine weeks and the various phases.


Discussion of Matter of Public Importance

MR SPEAKER: I have received a letter from Mr Berry proposing that a matter of public importance be submitted to the Assembly for discussion, namely:

The importance of maintaining the Namadgi National Park with public management and in public ownership.

MR BERRY (3.45): Mr Speaker, this has been a matter which has caused some agitation in the community. Too often we take our natural environment for granted. Too often we fail to notice how fragile our environment is. At the same time I think we would all be happy to note that over the last decade or so many of our friends in the community have learnt that our resources are not finite, that the environment is fragile and that habitats lost cannot be found again. This recognition has led to other things -

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .