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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 1 Hansard (29 April) . . Page.. 124 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

I raise that, not in order to appear to be niggardly with the money that the Government has available to provide for the care of those people. I fully adopt the remarks made by Mr Wood and Mr Quinlan in respect of these matters - that there needs to be a compassionate approach to these matters to bring residents like that out of nursing home settings and into more normal settings, if you like, to give them an opportunity of living lives which are better adjusted to the mainstream of society. The title of the project is "Canberra's Own Options of Living". It is a way of bringing people into less institutionalised settings. We have to acknowledge and recognise the support that goes into that process to make it effective and to make it work. There is very considerable government, or taxpayers', money going into that process.

But we have also, in this place, been subject in the past to very severe criticism by the Assembly when budgets have not been managed properly. The budget for the Macquarie houses has blown out quite considerably. Members of the Assembly are right to hold the Government to account when it does not manage things within budget. In respect of the Fisher houses, Mr Kendrick has made it clear that he considers the budget to be an appropriate budget. It is not insufficient to meet the task of housing eight residents, but - - -

Mr Berry: Who ordered the change of the report?

MR HUMPHRIES: No-one in the Government, Mr Berry. Mr Speaker, the fact is that, if we simply place residents in the Fisher houses before ascertaining whether there is a viable basis to support those residents appropriately and humanely in those residences, then we run the risk of again blowing out the budget, as is the case with Macquarie - and, incidentally, getting quite unhappy residents into the bargain. No-one would expect us to do that. Our responsibility to manage the resources of the Government, of the community, well is pretty important - indeed, you might say "paramount".

Mr Quinlan: Can we change the management?

MR HUMPHRIES: Changing the management is one option. Mr Quinlan raises the issue of management. Members may be aware that a particular community organisation won the right, by tender, to be the body that would deliver services in those residences at Fisher. That body has pulled out of that arrangement now, and I understand that they have cited the very acrimonious relationship between the two parties here as the reason. I do not know whether I would say that they have cited the acrimony between the department and the residents as the source of the problem; but they have certainly indicated to me that they see it being very difficult, or impossible, in the circumstances, to work with the residents and their representatives. That is what has been put to me.

That simply tells me that there is a great deal of baggage that has been carried in this debate and we need to try to somehow get past all that to a situation where we can operate on a sustainable, budget-efficient basis in the future for those residences at Fisher. Mr Moore has the task of making that happen. He is the new Minister. He will need to negotiate those arrangements and try to cut through the history of this matter

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