❓ Hon Jon Ford questions the Minister for Mental Health regarding the potential privatisation of transport services for individuals subject to transport orders under the draft Mental Health Bill 2011. The Minister clarifies the intent is to broaden transport options beyond police, but doesn't rule out private providers like St John Ambulance or Royal Flying Doctor Service.
AnsweredQoN 166Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
DRAFT MENTAL HEALTH BILL 2011 —
TRANSPORT ORDERS
166. Hon JON FORD to the Minister for Mental Health:
I refer to the draft mental health bill 2011, which states
that a transport order currently carried out by police authorises a police
officer or a person prescribed by regulations to apprehend, transport and
detain a person to whom a transport order applies.
(1) Who does the
minister consider are candidates for ''a person prescribed by
regulations''? For example, has the minister met with any potential
contractors in the past 12 months; and, if so, which ones?
(2) Given the
overwhelming number of public submissions objecting to the possible
privatisation of the transport of vulnerable patients, can the minister give a
guarantee that private operators will not be performing this function; and, if
not, why not?
The PRESIDENT : There are aspects of that question
that border on seeking an opinion, but there are aspects that are clearly
contained within the minister's portfolio. Minister for Mental Health.
TRANSPORT ORDERS
166. Hon JON FORD to the Minister for Mental Health:
I refer to the draft mental health bill 2011, which states
that a transport order currently carried out by police authorises a police
officer or a person prescribed by regulations to apprehend, transport and
detain a person to whom a transport order applies.
(1) Who does the
minister consider are candidates for ''a person prescribed by
regulations''? For example, has the minister met with any potential
contractors in the past 12 months; and, if so, which ones?
(2) Given the
overwhelming number of public submissions objecting to the possible
privatisation of the transport of vulnerable patients, can the minister give a
guarantee that private operators will not be performing this function; and, if
not, why not?
The PRESIDENT : There are aspects of that question
that border on seeking an opinion, but there are aspects that are clearly
contained within the minister's portfolio. Minister for Mental Health.
AnswerView source ↗
Once again, because it is without
notice and I do not have it in front of me, I may not cover one or two of the
points.
(1)–(2) In
terms of the reason, for a start, that the transport orders are changing in the
mental health bill, it is so that people other than police will be enabled to
provide authorised transport for mentally ill people, especially from hospital
to hospital, which happens at the moment, and sometimes from the community to
the hospital.
There are times when the police will
still have to provide that service. For example, if a person became extremely
unwell in a regional town such as Narrogin, or somewhere like that, and needed
transportation to the metropolitan area to an authorised facility, it is most
likely that the police will be asked to continue to provide that service. An
existing service is already operating, which I have had some discussions with,
at the forensic mental health unit. That is a government-run service; the
forensic mental health unit actually has a transportation service that operates
specifically for that service.
I have not had any discussion with
any other provider, but I say quite clearly that it is not my intention to be
so prescriptive as to preclude options that may be considered suitable in this
arrangement. At this stage, there are opportunities for us to develop. St John
Ambulance, for example, is a private operator. I think that St John Ambulance
does a pretty good job. The Royal Flying Doctor Service of Australia is another
private organisation that transports mentally ill people from remote areas of
the state to Perth. I think it does a fantastic job too. I will not be so
prescriptive that we cannot include organisations such as that to gain a
contract to provide a secure ambulance service, if that is the way we go. We
are looking at opportunities to make sure that the legislation does not
preclude services that could be better used.
notice and I do not have it in front of me, I may not cover one or two of the
points.
(1)–(2) In
terms of the reason, for a start, that the transport orders are changing in the
mental health bill, it is so that people other than police will be enabled to
provide authorised transport for mentally ill people, especially from hospital
to hospital, which happens at the moment, and sometimes from the community to
the hospital.
There are times when the police will
still have to provide that service. For example, if a person became extremely
unwell in a regional town such as Narrogin, or somewhere like that, and needed
transportation to the metropolitan area to an authorised facility, it is most
likely that the police will be asked to continue to provide that service. An
existing service is already operating, which I have had some discussions with,
at the forensic mental health unit. That is a government-run service; the
forensic mental health unit actually has a transportation service that operates
specifically for that service.
I have not had any discussion with
any other provider, but I say quite clearly that it is not my intention to be
so prescriptive as to preclude options that may be considered suitable in this
arrangement. At this stage, there are opportunities for us to develop. St John
Ambulance, for example, is a private operator. I think that St John Ambulance
does a pretty good job. The Royal Flying Doctor Service of Australia is another
private organisation that transports mentally ill people from remote areas of
the state to Perth. I think it does a fantastic job too. I will not be so
prescriptive that we cannot include organisations such as that to gain a
contract to provide a secure ambulance service, if that is the way we go. We
are looking at opportunities to make sure that the legislation does not
preclude services that could be better used.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.