Penny Wright (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I too rise to take note of the Australian government's response to the Senate Community Affairs References Committee report on the inquiry into Commonwealth funding and administration of mental health services. I acknowledge the comments made by the government in its response and I recognise that the government is progressing with the budget commitments it made in 2010-11.

I would like to acknowledge that a solid commitment to mental health was made at that time by the government, and it was described by the government at the time as a 'centrepiece', with a view to increasing funding over a period of time. Approximately $1.5 billion of funding was allocated in the five-year package of new initiatives or the expansion of existing ones. The government is rolling out those initiatives and seems on track to satisfy the agenda that was then set, with the recent announcement of 15 new locations for headspace services, the gradual national expansion of the EPPIC model and the commencement of the National Mental Health Commission and its report card, which we are currently anticipating. However, progress is slow and the investment is perhaps not the centrepiece that we originally thought and hoped for, given the extent of the chronic underfunding of mental health services over a long period of time in Australia and the fact that this is continuing to be the case. We know that mental ill-health makes up 13 per cent of the total burden of disease in Australia but that funding for mental health services is only around half of that, at six to seven per cent. Some stakeholders fear that funding is decreasing rather than increasing, given the proportion of mental health funding as opposed to the increases in the overall health budget.

We should be striving towards achieving funding of mental health services that is commensurate with the burden of disease. Research indicates that only 38 per cent of those who have experienced a mental health problem in a year were seen in relation to that problem during that year, so there is clearly still a great degree of unmet need, and that does not even cover those people who do not have or who have not been diagnosed with a mental health problem or issue, although there are also many of those. The absence of effective evaluation and accountability processes also raises the question of whether the money currently being spent is being targeted where it is needed most and whether we are indeed rewarding the right programs, because there are many innovative and effective community based mental health services out there.

Unfortunately, as we have seen with the Mental Health Nurse Incentive Program, it appears that this is not necessarily the case. The Mental Health Nurse Incentive Program, for instance, is an excellent mental health service that assists many of our most vulnerable members in the community to live healthy lives. Funding of the program was frozen in May this year before any valuation was undertaken. There is anecdotal evidence becoming available to me that the freeze in funding has in fact cut services by more than 20 per cent, effectively, across the board. Given the important work that mental health nurses do, often assisting people with severe and persistent mental illnesses to remain as well as possible and to participate in the community, this outcome is very concerning. I am also aware that these nurses provide an essential service in rural and remote Australia, where workforce issues are of great concern and where it is often very difficult to get specialised mental health practitioners.

Another area of concern is indeed the lack of targeted funding to rural and remote mental health services. Despite investments in the 2010-11 budget, gaps in mental health services for people living in rural and remote areas are a continuing serious concern. The statistics bear this out, but so do the stories and experiences that I have been hearing in my ongoing consultation with people in the bush. The Australasian Centre for Rural and Remote Mental Health stated that 'the 2011-12 budget mental health package contained no specific mental health programs or allocations for rural and remote Australians, nothing that demonstrates understanding and care'. Recent reports about high levels of suicide in rural and remote areas have also highlighted the continuing theme of unmet need and lack of access to services in these areas.

In addition, there is an unequal distribution of health professionals between urban and rural and remote areas. We know that 91 per cent psychiatrists have their main practice in a metropolitan area and only nine per cent in rural areas. The unequal distribution of mental health services in rural and regional Australia poses far-reaching consequences for both individuals and their communities. An inability to obtain proper mental health care can affect a person's ability to complete their education, maintain employment, engage in social and community activities and form healthy relationships, and it contributes to a greater risk of developing physical illnesses. It is therefore vital that adequate funding and attention is given to all aspects of mental health in Australia.

In relation to rural and remote Australia we must ensure that equal need equates to equal distribution of mental health services. Given the government's recent injection of funding in the mental health sector, it is timely to review the impact of that funding and whether it is in fact improving the delivery of mental health services throughout Australia in terms of the actual outcomes and the lived experiences of the people who need those services. Identifying current unmet need and gaps in service delivery in regional, rural and remote Australia is something that the Greens are particularly concerned about. As spokesperson for mental health for the Australian Greens it is my view that this is an area of mental health policy that has been neglected for far too long. We want to work towards increasing funding for mental health over coming years so that it is commensurate with the burden of the disease, and we want to make sure that it is reaching those people who need it, that it is well targeted and that, ultimately, we see results which mean that Australians who have need of services are able to access them.