Page 604 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 11 February 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
beds. Finally, we have the ALP-Greens agreement which details three mental health initiatives.
The agreement commits the ACT government to continuing to increase the proportion of the health budget spent on mental health with a goal of reaching 12 per cent of overall health funding. In 2003 it was estimated that mental illness was the third largest cause of disease burden or loss of health through death and illness in Australia, and that accounts for 13 per cent of the total burden of disease. Presently, the ACT government spends 8.9 per cent of its health budget on mental health.
The agreement also commits the ACT government to allocate 30 per cent of mental health funding by 2012 to the community sector for the delivery of services. In contrast, the ALP’s election proposal for mental health was for 15 per cent of that funding to the community sector. It may be that COAG funding makes up much of the difference between the current 13 per cent and the new goal of 30 per cent, but we will be watching this closely to ensure that the government community services do not pick up or take funding that is meant for the actual community sector.
The agreement also calls for recurrent funding for mental health training for emergency service workers and teachers commencing in 2009-10 to assist in promotion, prevention and early intervention and possibly to improve the manner in which emergency service workers deal with people suffering from an acute mental health episode. A relevant plan will need to build these agreements in.
More specifically, the mental health plan needs to include clear targets for 2013. Some of the targets should include funding levels as per the agreement and specific outcomes. We need something concrete that can be measured while the plan is being implemented to track whether or not it is working. The draft plan could include targets relating to mortality, morbidity and comorbidity resulting from mental health problems, economic participation and workforce productivity for people with mental health problems, relapse admission rates and consumer perception of services provided. The plan should also provide some commitment to the manner in which these targets would be achieved.
I acknowledge that an implementation plan is still to come and that this is where most of the detail will be expanded upon. I also acknowledge that section 5.2 of the draft plan lists a number of programs and strategies. But the description of those programs and strategies is vague, and I remain concerned that the draft plan provides little commitment or explanation from which an implementation could flow. Take, for example, programs and strategies listed under innovation. All it says is that strategies and actions are required to develop capacity of the research and mental health sector and that we should subject such programs to evaluation. I would have liked to see the plan list the many innovative programs that are already occurring in the ACT and how they could be further supported or developed in the future. This includes headspace and the development of social firms or social enterprise hubs.
I am also concerned that the evaluation is yet to be conducted on the 2003-08 mental health strategy and action plan or the 2006-08 mental health promotion, prevention and early intervention action plan. What successes were achieved under these plans?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .