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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 6 Hansard (24 May) . . Page.. 1640 ..

MR KAINE (continuing):

government trying to shove the responsibility off onto an advisory committee, the evaluators or somebody else. It is their problem, their project, and they should be held accountable for it.

These are critical matters. They are critical matters that must be dealt with before the trial begins. They cannot be left until some time later, as being somehow inconsequential. I put it to the minister that the matters I have raised need to be dealt with before he switches on his trial, not later. They should not be left open for interpretation as to what the outcomes are expected to be or how we are going to determine what the outcomes are.

These are important matters. They are important matters because so many people in this community do not support this trial and the government had better get it right. Some half-baked trial or some attempt to produce a report at the end of the time that does not really deal with the issues, that deals with ill-defined issues like the ones that the minister has already said he has agreed to as the evaluation criteria, will not suffice. They are not evaluation criteria; they are the basis of a data collection exercise.

I need an explanation of how the evaluation of them at the end of the day is going to work. I have not had one yet and I am very concerned that we will have the trial, all right, and then we will get some soft evaluation of it that tells us what a wonderful trial it has been, with no objective facts about it. I do not think that is good enough. I ask members to support this motion.

MR MOORE (Minister for Health and Community Care) (11.41): Through you, Mr Speaker, I wish to address those comments from Mr Kaine. First of all, I would like to say that I welcome Mr Kaine's motion. I think that it is a very sensible motion. I also welcome the general discussion that he has begun.

I understand that Mr Kaine opposes the particular process, but he and the rest of us have put that behind us. The decision of the Assembly has been made. It was made by a narrow majority, I concede, as many of our decisions are, and we are now getting on with the work. Mr Kaine has drawn our attention to the fact that there is a wide range of views in the community on this matter. In his view, by no means the majority of the community support this trial. We certainly know that a large number of people do not support the trial and it is important that we monitor the success of the trial.

I will just take up one or two items as to matters of fact. Mr Kaine, the trial is set down in the legislation for two years. It is very clear in the legislation that it is to be for two years. I should say that the legislation sets out a series of things which I am compelled to do and I will do those things according to the legislation. That will be the area that governs most strongly where I go. The motion before the Assembly, which the government welcomes, will help to provide guidance as to what we should and should not do.

Mr Kaine suggests that the most important thing in this motion is that we ensure that we have a proper scientific trial. I could not agree more. I have always wanted that to be the case and I will continue to ensure that that is the case. Coming with that is a series of things that force it to be at arms length from me. It would be entirely inappropriate for me

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