Page 3009 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 23 August 2005
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I question whether it is appropriate to give this position the authority to choose between competing priorities across disability services, children’s services, health services and services for older people. There is a risk that problems may arise in relation to the distribution of resources and agreement on priorities. Such problems could result in substantial delays in decision making and could lead to conflict that might jeopardise the work of individual commissioners. It is our view that the individual commissioners should retain responsibility for their respective areas of work, and we will be moving a number of amendments to achieve this.
The ACT Greens also believe that the functions of the commission and the individual commissioners as described in clause 6 of the bill are too narrow, focused primarily on responding to complaints and examining issues related to service provision. While these functions are fundamental and essential, there is scope for the commission to do more. I believe the commission’s functions should also include promoting citizens’ rights and examining issues facing groups of people in their role as citizens rather than service users.
A relatively small proportion of people use formal support services. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics survey of disability, ageing and carers, 79 per cent of people with a disability who need regular assistance receive help from relatives and friends, while just 53 per cent use formal services such as home care. The Australian government department of health reports that only 20 per cent of people aged 70 years and over use government-funded care services. Government and community services provided to children and young people are just one component of their experience. They will also be influenced by factors such as community attitudes and opportunities to participate in democratic processes.
There are often issues beyond the context of service delivery that impact broadly on the human rights of an affected population. For example, the children and young people’s commissioner in New South Wales recently undertook a broad investigation into the involvement of children and young people in daily work, finding that over half of those in years 7 to 10 work and that, while most enjoy working and its financial, social and personal benefits, there are also serious issues in relation to the number that have been injured and verbally or physically harassed.
I have heard anecdotal evidence that similar concerns exist in the ACT, so we would like to see the ACT human rights commission given statutory authority to undertake comparable work in areas of public importance wherever issues might arise. The bill as currently drafted does not preclude such activity, but neither does it provide an adequate platform. We have circulated a number of amendments to insert an additional function for the commission in clause 6. This additional function articulates a role for the commission in promoting human rights in the community, identifying and examining issues that affect the human rights and welfare of vulnerable groups in the community, and making recommendations to government and non-government agencies on legislation, policies, practices and services that affect vulnerable groups in the community. Related amendments insert comparable functions into the role of each individual commissioner.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .