HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2)
2017-05-10 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Oakden Mental Health Facility

Mr MARSHALL (Dunstan—Leader of the Opposition) (14:51): How does the Premier justify his ongoing support for the minister claiming that she acted as soon as she was made aware of this, given that the Chief Psychiatrist has reported significant problems were known as far back as 2007 and 'have been present throughout the last 10 years'? How is it that the Premier is not prepared for any of his ministerial colleagues to take responsibility for the problems of Oakden which have been known for years and years and years?

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL (Cheltenham—Premier) (14:51): I don't know whether the Leader of the Opposition does this deliberately or whether he does it accidentally, but he has completely ignored the factual material that we have just put before the house. When the minister in 2007—

Mr Marshall: 2007—that is what the Chief Psychiatrist said.

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: Yes, he did, and this is the same Chief Psychiatrist who said that these matters were not observable to him when he was in the facility just last year. The very same Chief Psychiatrist who has reached these conclusions, and I presume you are not seeking to impugn his credit, has said that merely walking through the facility, one wouldn't have been aware of these things. Indeed, he was in the facility—

Mr Marshall: Come on!

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: Well, these are his words.

The SPEAKER: The leader is warned for the second and final time.

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: These are his words, not my words, so if you want to take issue with the credibility of the Chief Psychiatrist, do so, but I don’t think it will reflect well on the Leader of the Opposition's credit. He said that he was in the facility for 2½ hours dealing with concerns in the middle of last year and was unaware of the depth of the concerns that have been now revealed. Indeed, he said that without the forensic inquiry where he spent day after day, week after week in this facility speaking to multiple staff, seeking to get them to reveal what they had previously concealed, he still wouldn't have got to the bottom of it. This was the report that was given to John Hill in 2011 about what had happened over the previous three years:

A strategy has been implemented to reassure both the Department of Health and Ageing and the Aged Care Standards and Accreditation Agency that improvements made in Makk and McLeay would be maintained…

There has been significant amount of learning, changes and development of individuals in their roles and functions within Makk and McLeay. Staff have a better understanding of the requirements under the Accreditations Standards and are aware of the need to pursue continuous improvement having a resident focus…

Older Persons Mental Health Services do not consider that accreditation is at risk, but as with any nursing home, there is potential for issues to arise which may impact on the accreditation…

When the ACH Group contract expired—

after three years, of bringing in an aged-care provider—

meetings were held with the Department of Health and Ageing, which were supportive of the strategies suggested and confirmed that Makk and McLeay is no longer under the scrutiny generated by previous non-compliance with standards. The Aged Care Standards and Accreditation Agency was also supportive of the strategies outlined, and advised that Makk and McLeay can expect an unannounced review visit shortly following the end of the ACH Group contract.

Of course, what they did was they got a further two three-yearly accreditations without qualification. This is what ministers were aware of. Individual incidents being raised in any of our facilities—whether they are hospitals, aged-care facilities—are, of course, a cause for concern. We ask for them to be investigated and we respond to them when people raise issues, but we don't immediately assume that we have a culture that is so devastatingly bad that service quality is profoundly compromised, unless there is something that draws that to our attention. When the minister began to suspect that, she then instituted the inquiry that revealed that very thing.

Members are in here. They did not ask a question of the minister—

Mr Duluk interjecting:

The SPEAKER: I warn the member for Davenport.

The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: —before she instituted this inquiry. The media did not ask a question of the minister before she instituted this inquiry. She exposed herself, and indeed this government, to a deep inquiry, a searching inquiry, about matters that we knew were not going to be pleasant but that were necessary to ensure we got to the bottom of what appeared to be an alarming number of cases of abuse and neglect which seem to be clustered towards 2016.

The SPEAKER: The Premier's time has expired. Leader.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT