Gary Humphries (ACT, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to indicate that I do not support this motion and to indicate the reasons for that. Let me say at the outset that I do not necessarily disagree with the comments that have been made in this debate about problems with the Commonwealth State/Territory Disability Agreement. Various manifestations of this agreement have been long standing, but there is still some dysfunction in the way territories, states and the Commonwealth share the load of determining an appropriate response to the needs of those in our community with disabilities. For example, in the inquiry that the Senate Community Affairs References Committee conducted into the needs of disabled people lodged in Australian nursing homes, we saw very clear evidence of that dysfunction.

Having said that, however, I do not believe that the process that is at work here is appropriate to deal with this question at this time. Looking through the Notice Paper, I note that there is no other committee of the Senate—standing or select; references or legislation—which appears to have as many matters currently before it as do the community affairs committees, in either the references or legislation manifestations. On my reckoning, there are something like eight separate matters before the community affairs committee at the moment. They include the inquiry into toxic dust, which was to have reported today but is now reporting in May. Only yesterday, I think, another bill was referred to the committee. That was on top of an inquiry to be conducted today into aged care bond bills. There is a report to be produced on the additional estimates hearings last month; budget estimates are also coming up very soon. A major inquiry into petrol sniffing is presently in train, and members of the committee travelled only last week to the Northern Territory for that inquiry and will travel to Queensland next week. Tomorrow there is a further hearing—a roundtable discussion—on gynaecological health issues, and there is also an annual reports report to be prepared. That does not provide for a number of other matters which I know or suspect are in the pipeline.

The committee had informally discussed a process for dealing with the workload, and there was some informal discussion about having a meeting where the committee would assess what issues were pressing on it for consideration in the course of this 12-month period. Members of the committee and participating members may be aware of other issues that are being considered or will be considered by the committee, and I think those issues deserve some consideration as well. However, I think that a proper process should see these issues examined in a different process from the one that has been proposed by Senator McLucas, and for that reason I do not support the motion before the Senate.