Mr chairman: Good morning. I welcome Mr Vatskalis, and invite you to introduce the officers accompanying you, and if you wish to make an opening statement on behalf of the Department of Health and Families. Minister vatskalis’ portfolios

ESTIMATES COMMITTEE PROCEEDINGS – 17 JUNE 2010 
Rural and Remote Services initiative, so they fund some non-government agencies to provide allied 
health services to clusters of communities. We have, I think three at the moment in the Territory, three 
clusters. We are also diversifying our teams to employ not only psychologists but occupational 
therapists and social workers. It is a very progressive process. I know that particularly the community 
control sector is very keen to have a psychologist in each remote community but, in terms of 
workforce issues and the pragmatics of achieving that, it would be a very long-term goal.
 
 
Mr VATSKALIS: But from 20 August 2010, we have a Territory-wide 24-hour telephone service, so 
people in the community can actually contact and find out about people if they present themselves, or 
they can present at the clinics with mental health problems.
 
 
Mr WOOD: My understanding of psychiatrists in remote areas is one that sits down and talks to 
people one-on-one or families one-on-one. That is all my questions.
 
 
Ms PURICK: I just have one question. Minister, the Mental Health Carers NT, is a group I am sure 
you are familiar with. They are a non-government organisation that provides invaluable support to 
patients and also the people who care for people with mental health issues. They have a respite 
house, they provide the creation of support, and a group of them utilise my meeting room on a weekly 
basis for carers, so I am familiar with their operations and the need for the services they provide.
 
 
By the department’s own admission in their secure care facility application for development, there is a 
growing need to have facilities and services for people with mental health issues across the board. My 
question is, and I know that the government already supports this group, and I know they get some 
support from the Commonwealth government to deliver their services; my question is: I understand 
they have made approaches to you about trying to secure a measly $500 000 to go into a facility on 
Dick Ward Drive near the tower, which has become available, so that they can house all of their 
office, their support services, some of their patient services in one facility. 
 
 
My question is, if the government can find tens of millions of dollars to give to the turf club, surely you 
can find $500 000 in additional funding to support this invaluable non-government organisation and 
the services they deliver. I am not trying to pre-empt discussions you might have with them, but my 
working with some of the people, and some people in my electorate, it is a huge need and not too 
much money.
 
 
Mr VATSKALIS: Mental health carers and (inaudible) tune of nearly $300 000 a year (inaudible) 
funding. 
 
 
Ms PURICK: That is right, that is not a large amount of money when you give $12m to the turf club.
 
 
Mr VATSKALIS: Certainly we are very happy to look at this, but also we would point out to them 
Commonwealth funding authorities where they can secure some funding from there. I am happy to 
discuss this issue with them again, and look at how we can help to get some money out of the 
Commonwealth, not only the Territory. 
 
 
Ms PURICK: I do not disagree, minister, but it would be in the interest of efficiency and effectiveness 
if all their operations could be housed in one location, which is available now, and as I understand, it 
would suit their operation. They have got an office here, they have some support stuff being done at 
St Peters Church Hall, which they have to pack up every time and shut down. Is it is very destabilising 
for a group of people.
 
 
Mr VATSKALIS: I would be happy to continue a discussion with them and see if we can find a way to 
help them. 
 
 
Ms PURICK: It may be a combination of their effort and your effort to go to the Commonwealth.
 
 
Mr VATSKALIS: It could be also that $0.5m might be - a government building could accommodate 

---

ESTIMATES COMMITTEE PROCEEDINGS – 17 JUNE 2010 
them. It is not only giving the money out, let us find the best solution for them, how they can all be 
together and how we can assist them.
 
 
Ms PURICK: Thank you, minister, it is a vital service. Thank you Chairman.
 
 
Mr CHAIRMAN: That concludes consideration Output 3.2.
 
 
Output 3.3 – Community Support Services for Frail Aged and People with a Disability
 
 
Mr CHAIRMAN: We now move to Output 3.3, and I believe the member for Sanderson is the shadow.
 
 
Mr WILSON: Can I make a comment on the record, I am aware this is all on Hansard. As the acting 
Chief Executive, I need to get on record my concern about the comment that Alison made. I 
appreciate it was made ad hoc, and was not meant to harm. We have absolute integrity, confidence, 
and competence in our director of Mental Health. I need that on the record. I am sure that was not an 
offence.
 
 
Ms ANDERSON: Exactly, and I withdraw, minister, and apologise. I said it was like a drunken slur. I 
did not mean anything on you.
 
 
Mr WILSON: Absolutely, and there is no question about that.
 
 
Mr CHAIRMAN: The committee welcomes that clarification.
 
 
Mr WILSON: I thank you Alison, I appreciate it was not meant with malice at all.
 
 
Mr STYLES: In relation to Community Support Services for Frail Aged and People with a Disability 
with a Budget 2009-10 allocation of $72.215m, and Budget 2010-11, $73.873m, which is an increase 
of 2.29%. Given Treasury’s projected figures for inflation in 2010 is 3.1%, and the inflation rate in 
2011 is 3.4%, are you aware there are a considerable number of non-government organisation 
service providers in the area of disability provision which are suffering cutbacks, and given the current 
budget does not keep pace with inflation, there is a real issue, in dollar value, of these people 
receiving even less. Are you aware of the cutbacks these NGOs are suffering?
 
 
Mr VATSKALIS: Member, the 2009-10 estimate was $72m, the 2010-11 budget is $73m, you say a 
variation of about $1.6m increase. You have to remember Budget 2009-10 included $2.7m programs 
that were carried forward in 2008-09. That is the only reason why the figure is elevated. The $1.6m 
not only increased - that $73m includes - is much bigger than 2009-10 because 2009-10 had extra 
money transferred from the year before. In addition, there will be $1.4m coming to the budget 
because it is fee for service based so it increases more than $1.6m, it would be at least $2m. That 
was significantly higher than the estimate of 2009-10, which should have been about $69m rather 
than $72m.
 
 
Mr STYLES: Given that is the explanation, why is that non-government service providers are 
suffering cutbacks? I give you an example. I have spoken to many of them and just one …
 
 
Mr VATSKALIS: I know you wrote to them. We have a copy of the letters.
 
 
Mr STYLES: The arthritis and osteoporosis service - their board is actually considering closure at this 
point in time as an option because, with their cutbacks, they are looking at either the staff going or the 
rent going, and they have two part-time staff. The board is actually considering closure. That is just 
one and, given the time factor here, I will not go into the others.
 
 
Ms CLEARY: We are not aware of any reductions in non-government organisational funding. We do 
pass on the CPI to non-government organisations, so there must be additional costs that have hit that 

---