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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 9 Hansard (23 August) . . Page.. 3247 ..

The Carers Association's perspective is that, leaving abusive carers aside, it is not that those carers are incapable of looking after their own affairs, although the Carers Association says that this is how it feels to some people who are in the situation of being the carer but not the decision-maker. It may be just one role too many. It may be that they are overwhelmed or confused by the tribunal. The tribunal aims to be open to everyone, but it unavoidably is a legal place. The point is that there are some carers who feel disempowered by the process and feel that the decision-making role, however necessary, makes their family relationship or friendship and support role more difficult.

The purpose of my amendment is, firstly, to make it clear in the legislation that carers are recognised and have an important role. The Office of the Community Advocate and the Public Trustee have told my office that this is their practice in any case. What having it in the law will do is make it absolutely clear to carers that they are valued. I believe the legislation is the proper place to spell out the principles that guide any procedure.

In preparing these amendments my officers worked with the Carers Association, people in the disability sector, and particularly ADICAS and the disability legal service, and have consulted with ACROD and DPI. We have also benefited from close consultation with the Office of the Community Advocate and with the Public Trustee, and with help from the departmental officer in the public law group. I am very pleased that we have been able to work in this way and I believe that these amendments are better for it. This is a complex area and it is of great importance to vulnerable people in the community. Thanks also to the parliamentary drafter who has put in a lot of time on this.

In making it clear to carers that they are valued, it is also essential not to divert from the main point of the bill, which is ultimately the wellbeing of people with a disability or incapacitating illness. To make it absolutely clear that the process of consultation with carers is not intended to detract in any way from the decision-making principles at subsection (5) (2), my amendment includes the qualifier that the decision-maker does not have to consult if this consultation would, in their opinion, adversely affect the interests of the protected person. It is also spelled out that this consultation is not the only consultation involved in making the decision.

The decision-making principles, which discuss the protected person's wishes, indicate very strongly that the protected person themselves will be the main source of information to the decision-maker. The qualifying clause in my amendment specifically addresses the situations in which the carer does not have the protected person's interests or wishes foremost in their dealings with the decision-maker, be that the Public Trustee or the Community Advocate.

The Community Advocate advises that their office deals with around one case of abuse a month. The amendment therefore reiterates the aim of the guiding principles here to make it absolutely clear that if consulting with the carer on a particular decision would adversely affect the person's interests, then the decision-maker is not required to consult. Consultation is a fundamentally important process in many decisions. Consulting does not, however, imply that the views expressed must become the final decision. Consultation is the respectful seeking of views and a responsibility to respond, to give an answer and weigh up the views expressed.

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