Page 700 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 28 March 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
of that committee, as was I. We tabled a report looking at the health of school-aged children in the ACT and that report was tabled for the interests of members and others on 7 May 2003 with some 48 recommendations and 68 subrecommendations.
One of the basic thrusts of the report, in my opinion, was to examine ways for programs to be implemented that could incorporate physical activities at school with a territory-wide nutrition strategy that should be promoted to all children, parents, teachers or guardians in a manner that would hopefully seek to improve general fitness, particularly of Canberra children, so as to avoid health problems associated with a lack of fitness or poor diet later in life.
It would be interesting at this point to know where the government got to with those recommendations. I’m not sure if Ms MacDonald was made aware of where the 48 recommendations and 68 subrecommendations ever went, and I wonder how many have been acted upon to date. It might be interesting and useful to get some sort of feedback on that report.
Naturally, from a practical perspective this would have wider benefits such as improved health of the broader population, reduced pressure on the health system and a community able to live more productive and enriched lives.
At the time of the report, the committee considered it to be somewhat revolutionary, I guess, to be conducting investigations into the health of school-aged children in the ACT. It was to be a commencement point of some sort to allow government the opportunity to commit to future investigations, with some commitment to addressing systemic failures, whether that meant there was evidence of duplication of programs or a need to provide further access to health information. It is disappointing, as my colleague Mr Stefaniak has pointed out:
Already the Government has axed one of its flagship programs ‘Kids at Play’. This will only save the Government around $150,000 a year and in return it will decrease the chances of ensuring our children become more physically active. Taking away this funding has a detrimental impact.
Again, I know that Mr Stanhope said that the government will be looking at areas of funding, and I echo the caution that my colleague Mr Stefaniak offers the government in saying, “Do look at what you are actually cutting.” With any programs for children we need to be very careful, given the exponential rise in obesity, as Ms MacDonald has already pointed out, amongst young children.
If the health of all Canberrans is a concern to this government, I would like to highlight again that it could quite easily see the error of its ways and perhaps shelve a few rather expensive pet projects that have been much talked about in this place, such as the busway or the arboretum, or even defer the construction of the prison, for which we do not know that we have funding put aside. It is quite reasonable that this is brought to the attention of the Canberra community—that this government is, at this point in its undesirable economic position, overtly concerned with the importance of grandiose projects at the possible expense of the health of Canberrans, and how important it is for government to implement programs that encourage healthier lifestyles.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .