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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 3 Hansard (27 March) . . Page.. 714 ..

MR STEFANIAK: Mr Speaker, to answer the member's question, I recently saw a number of people, including representatives from the P and C council, in relation to this matter. They appeared to be reasonably happy with what was happening and indeed indicated that they would get back to me if there were any further problems. I think this process, too, might be one of the ones that were affected by the bans; so it does not surprise me that no-one has got back to me. But certainly that invitation stands, and if anyone wants to get back to me in relation to it I would welcome that, as I indicated to the P and C council when I saw them about this and some other issues, I think about four weeks ago.

MS TUCKER: On a supplementary question: The P and C members are concerned, I can assure you, because that is why I am asking this question. I am sure that they will be in touch with you. But, given the answer yesterday, when you claimed that a board member who was a parent was equal representation to parent interests, I would have to disagree with that, because they have to represent the whole school. So, can the Minister assure us that in the process that is changing now with SPRAD, or, as it is called now, the development review process, parent interests will remain foremost in his mind so that there is a balance and so that it cannot become just a whitewash for perhaps only one part of the school interests? Parents obviously need to have a say in that.

MR STEFANIAK: As I indicated to the member, Mr Speaker, of course parental interest is crucial and foremost in my mind. I expect that, if there is any problem, people will get back to me in relation to this. In relation to the point yesterday, that was an overall committee which advises me on a number of matters, and I reiterate my comment yesterday in relation to that. That is a very different issue, as far as I see it, from the point Ms Tucker raises today.

Jindalee Nursing Home

MR WOOD: Mr Speaker, my question is to the Chief Minister, as Minister for Health and Community Care. Noting, Chief Minister, that you previously did nothing to overcome the claimed breaches of Commonwealth standards at Jindalee Nursing Home, what will you now do if those standards are not conformed to in the next six months?

MRS CARNELL: I am shocked, Mr Wood, that you have not listened in all of the times in this place that I have got up and spoken about the number of things that we did prior to the sale to try to lift the number of issues or areas in which Jindalee Nursing Home did comply with the 31 Commonwealth quality standards. In fact, we put on a consultant - somebody with a lot of experience in this particular area - who worked with the management and the staff at Jindalee in an attempt to change practices to bring Jindalee up to scratch. That was after the first time - it might not have been the first time, but after one of the times - when the Commonwealth came in and said, "Look, Jindalee and ACT Government, you have to do something here because you are well below the level where we are happy to continue funding to Jindalee Nursing Home".

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