Page 2376 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 12 August 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
needs are met through linked services and systems; and men who use violence are held accountable and supported to change their behaviour.
In this budget $153,000 in additional funds is being provided to the Domestic Violence Crisis Service and the Canberra Rape Crisis Centre to support the ongoing provision of sexual assault counselling and crisis support in court for victims of domestic violence. Additional funds have been provided to the Domestic Violence Crisis Service to pilot the delivery of a domestic violence support group program.
This government remains committed to doing all we can to enhance the lives and status of women and girls in our community.
I will go to a few points that have been raised in the discussion. Mrs Jones made mention of the women’s information centre. She seems to continue to paint the picture that it is not delivering programs for women. There has not been a single stall or glitch in the programs being delivered. We are not delivering them out of the old premises in Civic but programs are still being delivered from premises in Civic, just across from us in the Theo Notaras centre, and also in regional centres, at the child and family centres and at other venues by a service provider who is providing a course or other facilities. I hear women say they want services delivered where they live, and that is exactly what we are doing.
With respect to some other comments that I heard—even though they are no longer my responsibility; Mr Gentleman will continue the carriage of these very essential services here in the ACT—there was mention made of the blueprint. As I understand it, Mr Gentleman has already commented on that. Ms Lawder’s comment was that she hoped this blueprint showed interaction with providers. That clearly showed she did not understand that from the get-go this blueprint was actually co-designed with community providers. That is why it has been so welcomed by the community providers, because they were there with us as a government, as a whole system, recognising the need to work together.
There were also comments around Care and Protection, indicating that the system continues to fail the community. It is a fraught, difficult area of service delivery. Yes, we have two very significant reviews into Care and Protection. Those opposite should take the time not only to read the reports but to read the work that has since been done. I refer, for example, to the milestone review panel that was established to report against the recommendations in the Public Advocate’s report. It can be seen that they had confidence in the change of culture and the change of practice within the system.
Mr Gentleman has already spoken about the out-of-home care strategy, which sets a clear future picture for service delivery. It means significant reforms and a new way of doing business because that is what we need to do—to have a focus on early intervention and family support.
It was disappointing to have someone of Ms Lawder’s calibre, who comes to this place from the community services sector, either unwittingly or deliberately—and I remain unsure which—continuing to misrepresent the efforts of not only the government in their service provision in human services but also many of our community providers.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video