HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)
2010-11-24 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

HEALTH AND COMMUNITY SERVICES COMPLAINTS COMMISSIONER

The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE (17:01): Thank you, Mr President. I do apologise. I am not as perfect as the government members and I was actually in a meeting. So, apologies that the only people who are perfect in this place tend to be the government. We are happy to have ministers go out and have meetings because they have important jobs to do.

The PRESIDENT: Order! This is about the Statutory Authorities Review Committee. You had better get onto it, the Hon. Mr Brokenshire, otherwise I will remind people of how much time we have to spend waiting for you.

The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE: I move:

That the Statutory Authorities Review Committee inquire into and report on the effectiveness of the Office of the Health and Community Services Complaints Commissioner having regard to—

1. Any concerns that members of the public or the committee have regarding the office’s responsiveness to complaints to the office;

2. Any proven outcomes since the creation of the office;

3. The adequacy of reporting by the office;

4. The adequacy in quantity and quality of reports produced by the office pursuant to section 54 of the Health and Community Services Complaints Act 2004;

5. Examples of use of the office’s discretionary powers under the said Act;

6. The staffing levels in the office and the efficiency and effectiveness of resource use by the office;

7. The number of complaints processed by the office in comparison to—

(a) the Ombudsman’s office prior to the formation of the office; and

(b) comparable offices interstate;

8. The extent to which the state government has contributed by acts or omissions to any shortcomings identified in the foregoing including by virtue of failures to meet its obligations under sections 19(2) and 67 of the said act;

9. Whether persons appointed to the Health and Community Services Advisory Council properly represent the intent of the said act;

10. Whether the term of office for the commissioner is appropriate in the circumstances;

11. Whether any amendments to the act are necessary to improve the effectiveness of the office; and

12. Any other relevant matter.

I have tabled the 12 points that I would ask that the committee look into with regard to the Office of the Health and Community Services Complaints Commissioner, and I will highlight a couple of the reasons why. First, under the former health minister, the Hon. Lea Stevens, the situation was that she, for the government, made a commitment at an election that there would not only be a commissioner but that there would be an ombudsman for health.

The appointment of an ombudsman for health never occurred and whilst the Hon. Lea Stevens, to give her credit, stuck to her word and wanted to have an ombudsman, it was softened down by the government to become a commissioner. I must say that it has cost the taxpayer several millions of dollars—I do not know if everyone knows that: they have an office but there does not appear to be a lot happening.

The Hon. J.M.A. Lensink: No-one's home.

The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE: No-one is home, as the honourable member says. Because it is a busy day I will move straight into the key points. As I said, there are 12 points, and I will not go through them again, but the important thing is that members of the public be permitted to attend proceedings of the committee investigations into this matter and that honourable members of either house of parliament be permitted to attend meetings of the committee, ask questions of witnesses and receive transcripts of proceedings upon giving not less than seven days' notice to the chair of the committee of his or her intended attendance at a given meeting. Obviously, we want to have members of the community come in and air their concerns to the committee.

I had hoped not to move this motion concerning the performance of the Office of the Health and Community Services Complaints Commissioner, but unfortunately the performance of the office has given my constituents enough reason to be concerned about it and convince me that there is merit in moving this motion. I will direct all of my comments in relation to this motion to the office, as it may well be that the commissioner has good reason to be in the position that she is in.

It is not a personal situation about the commissioner: it is about the office per se and the government's responsibility, under the act, to ensure that the office performs its work. I direct my comments to the outcomes of the office of the commissioner, for which ultimately the commission does have responsibility, but how the responsibility is brought home is a matter for the committee, if it believes the witnesses have made a case to be answered.

The principal constituent with whom I have been dealing, and with whom other colleagues in here may also have dealt, is Ms Pam Moore, who is the founder of the Health Rights and Community Action Group, which was established before the formation of the commissioner's office. Pam's group lobbied the current government—she is a dedicated person who at the moment has her own special needs—when it was in opposition, not when it was in government; this is a promise from back then—for the establishment of a health complaints commissioner, not with jurisdiction on community services as ended up being the case, but specifically on health.

I want to say very early on that I think the office itself is a visionary one and has great potential if it is being run properly. I am not canning the government completely on this. It is about the running of it. I note that the Northern Territory has a commissioner by the same name, though I am not sure how similar they are in function. That is most likely a matter for the committee to investigate.

Before 2002, the Ombudsman had jurisdiction to receive health complaints. He handled hundreds a year and conducted perhaps 20 to 40 inquiries into the performance of our health services. It is not clear to me, but it may be that the Ombudsmen retains of some residual jurisdiction to look into health matters. However, to my mind the government's intention in creating a commissioner was that the commissioner would be the first port of call for health complaints.

Pam lobbied Labor opposition members before the 2002 election to establish a specific health complaints commissioner. To her credit, the then shadow minister, the Hon. Lea Stevens, agreed and, after 2002, the Hon. Lea Stevens, as health minister, moved for the creation of a Health and Community Services Complaints Commissioner, adding capacity to complain to this commissioner about, for example, Families SA.

The 2003-04 act required the government to create an advisory committee and also a charter of rights but this is where my concerns are: until now, 2010, six years later (and, I am advised, over $1 million a year spent running the office), neither has been done. We have possibly had $4 million to $6 million worth of taxpayers' money spent and we have not had an advisory committee or a charter of rights. In a sense, the government has been in breach of the act and yet it has not been taken to task on that issue alone.

In conclusion, I would like to continue to put other matters on the record including comparison with the performance of equivalent offices interstate and the outcomes of the office itself. Much as I would like to do that now, I pause at this point, as evidently this select committee will not be established before the new year, given this is our last private members' day for this year. I have other matters to place on record, so I seek leave to conclude when we return in the new year.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

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