❓ A member of parliament questions the Minister for Community Development, Women’s Interests, Seniors and Youth regarding funding cuts and lack of action related to youth programs and services, prompting a defensive response highlighting a different approach to youth issues.
AnsweredQoN 608Legislative Assembly
Asked
9 April 2003
Member
Portfolio
Community Development, Women’s Interests, Seniors and Youth
QuestionView source ↗
I remind the minister that this is National Youth Week and refer her to the Australian Labor Party’s platform on young people, which states that Labor will pursue a proactive youth agenda, designed to give all young people a fair go and a chance to succeed in the wider community. (1) Will the minister inform the House why funding for the expansion of skate parks in Western Australia and the funding for youth advisory councils has ceased? (2) Why has funding for the cadet program been capped and funding to the youth grants area been cut back to one-fifth of the funding provided by the previous Government? (3) Why has the Office of Youth Affairs had its funding cut by $500 000 over the past two years? (4) Why is the youth services directory now two years out of date? (5) Why have there been no appointments of youths to boards as promised in the Government’s election campaign? (6) Why is the Office of Youth Affairs operating with fewer staff and now without a permanent director? Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time. Mr M.F. Board interjected The SPEAKER: I call the member for Murdoch to order for the second time. Members, I know that it has become practice to ask lengthy questions, and I am sure the minister took note of all the parts to that question. However, that number of parts in one question is beyond the acceptable level. I hope the minister noted all the parts of that question, but I urge members to limit their questions to a reasonable number of parts. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
(1) Will the minister inform the House why funding for the expansion of skate parks in Western Australia and the funding for youth advisory councils has ceased? (2) Why has funding for the cadet program been capped and funding to the youth grants area been cut back to one-fifth of the funding provided by the previous Government? (3) Why has the Office of Youth Affairs had its funding cut by $500 000 over the past two years? (4) Why is the youth services directory now two years out of date? (5) Why have there been no appointments of youths to boards as promised in the Government’s election campaign? (6) Why is the Office of Youth Affairs operating with fewer staff and now without a permanent director? Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time. Mr M.F. Board interjected The SPEAKER: I call the member for Murdoch to order for the second time. Members, I know that it has become practice to ask lengthy questions, and I am sure the minister took note of all the parts to that question. However, that number of parts in one question is beyond the acceptable level. I hope the minister noted all the parts of that question, but I urge members to limit their questions to a reasonable number of parts. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
(2) Why has funding for the cadet program been capped and funding to the youth grants area been cut back to one-fifth of the funding provided by the previous Government? (3) Why has the Office of Youth Affairs had its funding cut by $500 000 over the past two years? (4) Why is the youth services directory now two years out of date? (5) Why have there been no appointments of youths to boards as promised in the Government’s election campaign? (6) Why is the Office of Youth Affairs operating with fewer staff and now without a permanent director? Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time. Mr M.F. Board interjected The SPEAKER: I call the member for Murdoch to order for the second time. Members, I know that it has become practice to ask lengthy questions, and I am sure the minister took note of all the parts to that question. However, that number of parts in one question is beyond the acceptable level. I hope the minister noted all the parts of that question, but I urge members to limit their questions to a reasonable number of parts. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
(3) Why has the Office of Youth Affairs had its funding cut by $500 000 over the past two years? (4) Why is the youth services directory now two years out of date? (5) Why have there been no appointments of youths to boards as promised in the Government’s election campaign? (6) Why is the Office of Youth Affairs operating with fewer staff and now without a permanent director? Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time. Mr M.F. Board interjected The SPEAKER: I call the member for Murdoch to order for the second time. Members, I know that it has become practice to ask lengthy questions, and I am sure the minister took note of all the parts to that question. However, that number of parts in one question is beyond the acceptable level. I hope the minister noted all the parts of that question, but I urge members to limit their questions to a reasonable number of parts. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
(4) Why is the youth services directory now two years out of date? (5) Why have there been no appointments of youths to boards as promised in the Government’s election campaign? (6) Why is the Office of Youth Affairs operating with fewer staff and now without a permanent director? Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time. Mr M.F. Board interjected The SPEAKER: I call the member for Murdoch to order for the second time. Members, I know that it has become practice to ask lengthy questions, and I am sure the minister took note of all the parts to that question. However, that number of parts in one question is beyond the acceptable level. I hope the minister noted all the parts of that question, but I urge members to limit their questions to a reasonable number of parts. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
(5) Why have there been no appointments of youths to boards as promised in the Government’s election campaign? (6) Why is the Office of Youth Affairs operating with fewer staff and now without a permanent director? Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time. Mr M.F. Board interjected The SPEAKER: I call the member for Murdoch to order for the second time. Members, I know that it has become practice to ask lengthy questions, and I am sure the minister took note of all the parts to that question. However, that number of parts in one question is beyond the acceptable level. I hope the minister noted all the parts of that question, but I urge members to limit their questions to a reasonable number of parts. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
(6) Why is the Office of Youth Affairs operating with fewer staff and now without a permanent director? Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time. Mr M.F. Board interjected The SPEAKER: I call the member for Murdoch to order for the second time. Members, I know that it has become practice to ask lengthy questions, and I am sure the minister took note of all the parts to that question. However, that number of parts in one question is beyond the acceptable level. I hope the minister noted all the parts of that question, but I urge members to limit their questions to a reasonable number of parts. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time. Mr M.F. Board interjected The SPEAKER: I call the member for Murdoch to order for the second time. Members, I know that it has become practice to ask lengthy questions, and I am sure the minister took note of all the parts to that question. However, that number of parts in one question is beyond the acceptable level. I hope the minister noted all the parts of that question, but I urge members to limit their questions to a reasonable number of parts. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time. Mr M.F. Board interjected The SPEAKER: I call the member for Murdoch to order for the second time. Members, I know that it has become practice to ask lengthy questions, and I am sure the minister took note of all the parts to that question. However, that number of parts in one question is beyond the acceptable level. I hope the minister noted all the parts of that question, but I urge members to limit their questions to a reasonable number of parts. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
Mr M.F. Board interjected The SPEAKER: I call the member for Murdoch to order for the second time. Members, I know that it has become practice to ask lengthy questions, and I am sure the minister took note of all the parts to that question. However, that number of parts in one question is beyond the acceptable level. I hope the minister noted all the parts of that question, but I urge members to limit their questions to a reasonable number of parts. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
The SPEAKER: I call the member for Murdoch to order for the second time. Members, I know that it has become practice to ask lengthy questions, and I am sure the minister took note of all the parts to that question. However, that number of parts in one question is beyond the acceptable level. I hope the minister noted all the parts of that question, but I urge members to limit their questions to a reasonable number of parts. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
(1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver.
We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver.
We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver.
The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
(1) Will the minister inform the House why funding for the expansion of skate parks in Western Australia and the funding for youth advisory councils has ceased? (2) Why has funding for the cadet program been capped and funding to the youth grants area been cut back to one-fifth of the funding provided by the previous Government? (3) Why has the Office of Youth Affairs had its funding cut by $500 000 over the past two years? (4) Why is the youth services directory now two years out of date? (5) Why have there been no appointments of youths to boards as promised in the Government’s election campaign? (6) Why is the Office of Youth Affairs operating with fewer staff and now without a permanent director? Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time. Mr M.F. Board interjected The SPEAKER: I call the member for Murdoch to order for the second time. Members, I know that it has become practice to ask lengthy questions, and I am sure the minister took note of all the parts to that question. However, that number of parts in one question is beyond the acceptable level. I hope the minister noted all the parts of that question, but I urge members to limit their questions to a reasonable number of parts. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
(2) Why has funding for the cadet program been capped and funding to the youth grants area been cut back to one-fifth of the funding provided by the previous Government? (3) Why has the Office of Youth Affairs had its funding cut by $500 000 over the past two years? (4) Why is the youth services directory now two years out of date? (5) Why have there been no appointments of youths to boards as promised in the Government’s election campaign? (6) Why is the Office of Youth Affairs operating with fewer staff and now without a permanent director? Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time. Mr M.F. Board interjected The SPEAKER: I call the member for Murdoch to order for the second time. Members, I know that it has become practice to ask lengthy questions, and I am sure the minister took note of all the parts to that question. However, that number of parts in one question is beyond the acceptable level. I hope the minister noted all the parts of that question, but I urge members to limit their questions to a reasonable number of parts. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
(3) Why has the Office of Youth Affairs had its funding cut by $500 000 over the past two years? (4) Why is the youth services directory now two years out of date? (5) Why have there been no appointments of youths to boards as promised in the Government’s election campaign? (6) Why is the Office of Youth Affairs operating with fewer staff and now without a permanent director? Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time. Mr M.F. Board interjected The SPEAKER: I call the member for Murdoch to order for the second time. Members, I know that it has become practice to ask lengthy questions, and I am sure the minister took note of all the parts to that question. However, that number of parts in one question is beyond the acceptable level. I hope the minister noted all the parts of that question, but I urge members to limit their questions to a reasonable number of parts. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
(4) Why is the youth services directory now two years out of date? (5) Why have there been no appointments of youths to boards as promised in the Government’s election campaign? (6) Why is the Office of Youth Affairs operating with fewer staff and now without a permanent director? Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time. Mr M.F. Board interjected The SPEAKER: I call the member for Murdoch to order for the second time. Members, I know that it has become practice to ask lengthy questions, and I am sure the minister took note of all the parts to that question. However, that number of parts in one question is beyond the acceptable level. I hope the minister noted all the parts of that question, but I urge members to limit their questions to a reasonable number of parts. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
(5) Why have there been no appointments of youths to boards as promised in the Government’s election campaign? (6) Why is the Office of Youth Affairs operating with fewer staff and now without a permanent director? Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time. Mr M.F. Board interjected The SPEAKER: I call the member for Murdoch to order for the second time. Members, I know that it has become practice to ask lengthy questions, and I am sure the minister took note of all the parts to that question. However, that number of parts in one question is beyond the acceptable level. I hope the minister noted all the parts of that question, but I urge members to limit their questions to a reasonable number of parts. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
(6) Why is the Office of Youth Affairs operating with fewer staff and now without a permanent director? Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time. Mr M.F. Board interjected The SPEAKER: I call the member for Murdoch to order for the second time. Members, I know that it has become practice to ask lengthy questions, and I am sure the minister took note of all the parts to that question. However, that number of parts in one question is beyond the acceptable level. I hope the minister noted all the parts of that question, but I urge members to limit their questions to a reasonable number of parts. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time. Mr M.F. Board interjected The SPEAKER: I call the member for Murdoch to order for the second time. Members, I know that it has become practice to ask lengthy questions, and I am sure the minister took note of all the parts to that question. However, that number of parts in one question is beyond the acceptable level. I hope the minister noted all the parts of that question, but I urge members to limit their questions to a reasonable number of parts. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time. Mr M.F. Board interjected The SPEAKER: I call the member for Murdoch to order for the second time. Members, I know that it has become practice to ask lengthy questions, and I am sure the minister took note of all the parts to that question. However, that number of parts in one question is beyond the acceptable level. I hope the minister noted all the parts of that question, but I urge members to limit their questions to a reasonable number of parts. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
Mr M.F. Board interjected The SPEAKER: I call the member for Murdoch to order for the second time. Members, I know that it has become practice to ask lengthy questions, and I am sure the minister took note of all the parts to that question. However, that number of parts in one question is beyond the acceptable level. I hope the minister noted all the parts of that question, but I urge members to limit their questions to a reasonable number of parts. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
The SPEAKER: I call the member for Murdoch to order for the second time. Members, I know that it has become practice to ask lengthy questions, and I am sure the minister took note of all the parts to that question. However, that number of parts in one question is beyond the acceptable level. I hope the minister noted all the parts of that question, but I urge members to limit their questions to a reasonable number of parts. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Perth for the second time and the member for Murdoch for the third time. Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
Ms S.M. McHALE replied: I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
I thank the member for his question. (1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
(1)-(6) Indeed, this is National Youth Week. It is a week during which we reflect on and celebrate the achievements of our young people and the fact that they have a right to be heard here and now. On Friday, along with the member for Perth, I attended the opening of National Youth Week; in fact, I launched National Youth Week with the Governor General, who came to Perth. I get the intent of the member’s question, which I will paraphrase. He is trying to say that the approach that the Liberal Opposition took when in government is the only approach to young people. However, I say that there are very different ways to approach the issues for young people, and that the Opposition’s way was a very patronising approach. We on this side of the House get into the real issues for young people. The issues for young people are more than having an Office of Youth Affairs, over which the previous minister presided. The issues for young people are very complex. They are about accommodation, accessibility, opportunities and decent health systems, about which the Minister for Health knows full well, particularly ensuring that facilities are available on the ground for young people. Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
Our approach to young people is different from the tokenistic approach of the previous Government. We have increased funding for public spaces. One of the key issues for young people is that they feel they have a right in our community. Yes, I am proud that we are approaching things differently from the Opposition, which was a patronising, tokenistic, “we know better” view. We are doing things differently and, yes, we did save money from the amalgamation of the Office of Youth Affairs and Family and Children’s Services. We did that so that we could reprioritise money. During the estimates committee hearings last year, I made it very clear that we had saved about $400 000 from the amalgamation of the two offices. That is good management. It is not something to be criticised. We should be applauded for restructuring and saving money by reprioritising and allocating it to services. We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver.
We have previously discussed, for instance, the youth budget and cadet issues in this House. We have not capped the number of cadets who can be in programs. We have introduced a sliding scale for the subsequent years of membership. I have made this very clear. We have done that because the budget allocation for cadets cannot be infinite. We must manage programs, and we manage them in a way that will ensure the development of the programs. We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver.
We are approaching issues for young people differently, but the main difference is that we are listening to what they say and are taking account of their views. Other critical issues for young people include contemporary music, accommodation for young people at risk, health care and access to government services such as public transport. Let us get real about the issues facing young people. Let us have a realistic approach and deliver.
The SPEAKER: I call the member for Vasse to order for the first time.
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.