Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

Does that mean that services that should be available to other towns that would be paid for from the money that pays for these types of supports will not be available to other communities that require them? What happens if other communities put up their hands and say, 'Hey, we need a detox centre, we need a rehab centre, we need these wraparound services'? Does that mean that the trial sites will be prioritised and they will not get those things? How will that decision making occur? Secondly—this relates to evaluation, and I will go to evaluation later, but it does relate to budgets too—the evaluation will need to compare this approach, because it is a trial supposedly, to a centre that does not have the debit card. Will similar services be provided to another regional centre that does not have the debit card, to differentiate the debit card process and effect from the sorts of wraparound services that we all know are needed—in other words, comparing like with like? At the moment what you will be doing is looking at the trial and comparing it with the provision of the debit card and the services, whereas it is a lot of our contention that if you provide some of these early intervention services, rehab services, detox services and wraparound services it will in fact help tremendously to address issues around substance abuse and the sorts of things you say you are aiming for in this trial. That is a series of quite large questions. I appreciate that. Will other towns get this? Will you be specifically investing in these sorts of services in another town in order to be able to carry out a proper trial?