Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister Assisting the Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Hansard source

I rise tonight to draw to the attention of the House the plight of the mentally ill in this country. According to SANE Australia, 20 per cent of Australian adults are affected by some form of mental disorder every year. While anxiety disorders and depression are the most common mental illnesses, the remainder are psychotic conditions such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Around 20 per cent of Australians will suffer from depression and around 10 per cent of Australians will suffer from anxiety disorders at some time in their life. Schizophrenia is a persistent form of mental illness that affects approximately one per cent of Australians at some stage in their lives, while bipolar disorder will affect around two per cent of Australians. Even more concerning is that up to 12 per cent of Australians seriously affected by mental illness will eventually kill themselves, compared to an average of one per cent for the whole population.

While these figures are a great worry, there is some hope. According to SANE, most people with mental illness recover well and are able to lead fulfilling lives in the community when they receive appropriate ongoing treatment and support. However—and this is a very important factor—only about half of those affected with a mental illness actually receive treatment. This may be because there is a lack of services in the community. This may be because those suffering from a mental illness are not sure where to go to get help. But, nonetheless, only half of those affected with a mental illness actually receive treatment.

It is for these reasons that I am deeply concerned about the South Australian government’s proposed sale and redevelopment of Glenside Hospital. Members of the House would by now be familiar with the current situation regarding Glenside Hospital—a mental health facility in my electorate and a stone’s throw from the member for Boothby’s. The state government apparently has a $100 million master plan for Glenside Hospital which will see a cut in mental health services, while 42 per cent of the current site will be sold off to private developers to make way for a shopping centre and housing development. My constituents and I know that mental health services will be cut due to the proposed Glenside sale and redevelopment because the current Glenside Hospital will be closed and reopened with fewer beds.

This is essentially a loss of services. This loss of mental health beds will be compounded by the state government grouping mental health, drug and alcohol, and rural, regional and state-wide services into the same building site. This will see patients, professionals and visitors confined to a smaller space without the current advantage of therapeutic, established open space. This will be a disadvantage for the patients, their families and the healthcare workers. If only half of Australians affected by mental illness actually receive treatment, what hope is there for the mentally ill in South Australia, with the state government cutting the number of mental health beds at Glenside Hospital?

As I mentioned before, the South Australian government wants to sell off 42 per cent of the Glenside campus, important public land which was willed to the people of South Australia in the earliest days of the colony by their ancestors, to be handed down for future generations to enjoy. This land has been used by the Glenside Hospital patients to aid their rehabilitation. It provides a pleasant space for patients’ visiting families and friends. It is strongly argued by me that the carving up of this land would damage irreparably the local character of the area, the flora and fauna which will be immediately destroyed by this action and the future amenity of the residents of the local area and the citizens of Adelaide who use the campus more generally. I mean here specifically, but not exclusively, those members of the general public who use the site for sporting activities.

The sale of this land will lead to widespread destruction of significant trees and other flora and fauna. Much of this biodiverse environment has been established over more than 100 years. Its replacement with modern wetlands and a sculptured garden is no compensation for the loss of this environment. To suggest that it is insults the intelligence of local residents and others concerned with this redevelopment.

To lose this land which has served the South Australian community so well over the years to a housing development, as well as retail and commercial tenancies, would be an irreversible loss. There are already important, thriving retail and commercial tenancies in the surrounding district. They exist at the Burnside Village, Glen Osmond Road, Conyngham Street, the Parade, Fullarton Road and smaller businesses and shopping centre areas. There is no obvious demand for an expansion of these kinds of facilities and office space in the area. This is a clear attempt by the government to find interested buyers of the land, to raise funds and, along with the proposed wetlands, disguise what is essentially an urban infill project as something quite different.

The introduction of a major new housing development in the area will change the character of the suburbs of Glenside, Frewville and Eastwood in particular and Glenunga and Dulwich. What studies has the government undertaken as to the impact on the infrastructure, services and character of the existing area with the introduction of new housing, roads and residents? Existing residents of the area are highly concerned about the impact of this new housing. They have not been salved by the flaccid assurances of the relevant minister, the Hon. Gail Gago, Minister for Mental Health and Substance Abuse. The local community is not at all happy about this redevelopment. What makes matters worse is the fact that the state government is ignoring the local community and is not engaging in any legitimate form of consultation. So far, the only consultation that I have seen from the state government is to hold community meetings, which the mental health minister, Gail Gago, has refused to attend. I have attended these meetings, yet Minister Gago has snubbed them completely and has instead forced her public servants to face the music. This is unacceptable. As the minister responsible for mental health, Minister Gago should be front and centre of the consultation process. Instead, she is nowhere to be seen.

In a letter to the editor of the Eastern Courier, a local paper, which was published in December last year, a concerned resident summarised Minister Gago’s appalling attitude to the consultation process quite well:

I was one of the local residents who accepted Minister Gail Gago’s recent invitation to discuss the Rann Government’s decision to sell off forty two per cent of the Glenside Hospital open space land.

Despite the intimidation and red tape of actually getting into her office, I persisted, as I wanted to hear the Minister speak on the subject.

Thus far, she has refused to front any of the three recent public meetings held to discuss this matter.

I was disappointed that all we heard at this Ministerial meeting were “sound bites”, and that the decision was “non-negotiable”. Whenever questions got tough, the Minister’s minders, or Health Department officials took over the talking. It was a most unsatisfactory meeting.

I urge residents to register a protest at this forced removal of long term patients of Glenside Hospital and the distress this has caused their families and of the loss of our open space land for yet another shopping centre and land division.

Remember, once the forty two per cent of open space is gone, we can never get it back.

This lack of consultation was repeated yet again by the state government in February this year, when it announced its updated master plan for Glenside Hospital. Essentially, the only change which appeared on the updated plan was that the locations of where the new hospital and residential development would be built were swapped. Massada College is located right next door to the Glenside campus. This updated plan was released without even consulting the school community, even though this change will impact on the school. Massada College is on Flemington Street. This street is usually very busy, with parents dropping off and picking up their children from school. With the new Glenside Hospital now being proposed to be built right next door to the school, Flemington Street will become even more congested, with an influx of hospital traffic. This extra traffic poses a danger to the schoolchildren trying to cross the road. Yet again, without any consultation, the state government has gone ahead and just made its decision.

Finally, only last month the state government released the final master plan for the Glenside redevelopment. Hopefully Minister Gago will now consult with the public and personally answer their concerns. But I am not holding my breath. It is disappointing, to say the least, that mental health services in South Australia will be cut under the proposed Glenside sale and redevelopment. To the patients and families who rely on the services provided by Glenside Hospital, it is a slap in the face. The state government pretend that they are improving mental health services. They are building a new hospital but it will have fewer beds in it. Where will the mentally ill go? It appears that there will be nowhere for them to go because the land that was once used for their rehabilitation is up for sale. I, along with many local residents, want to see Glenside Hospital kept open, because the Glenside campus should be used to rehabilitate the mentally ill, not used for shoppers to buy the latest items. I believe the entire redevelopment should be postponed pending the satisfactory resolution of the concerns of local residents and their representatives. In the alternative, my hope and that of many residents is that while the redevelopment of mental health services proceeds there is no diminution— (Time expired)

See this speech in context