❓ Hon Sue Ellery questions the Minister for Mental Health regarding the Commissioner for Children and Young People's recommendation for a second draft of the Mental Health Bill 2011 and further public consultation. The Minister outlines the process of reviewing submissions and potential avenues for further input, but stops short of committing to a full rewrite.
AnsweredQoN 160Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
DRAFT
MENTAL HEALTH BILL 2011 — COMMISSIONER FOR CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE —RECOMMENDATION
160. Hon SUE ELLERY to the Minister for Mental Health:
I refer to the draft mental health
bill 2011 and to the short amount of time for public comment.
(1) Will the
minister support the recommendation of the Commissioner for Children and Young
People —
That
the Mental Health Commission should prepare a second Draft Mental Health Bill
2011 following detailed consideration of all submissions received in response
to the first draft and provide a further opportunity for public consultation
and comment.
(2) If not, why not?
MENTAL HEALTH BILL 2011 — COMMISSIONER FOR CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE —RECOMMENDATION
160. Hon SUE ELLERY to the Minister for Mental Health:
I refer to the draft mental health
bill 2011 and to the short amount of time for public comment.
(1) Will the
minister support the recommendation of the Commissioner for Children and Young
People —
That
the Mental Health Commission should prepare a second Draft Mental Health Bill
2011 following detailed consideration of all submissions received in response
to the first draft and provide a further opportunity for public consultation
and comment.
(2) If not, why not?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for the question.
(1)–(2) I
think that I might have already made a comment about this when I made my
ministerial statement on the mental health bill. However, I am aware of the
recommendation from the commissioner. I have indicated that in the first
instance I want to assess the issues that have been raised by the submissions
that have come in. At the moment they are being put into three or four
different categories. A whole bunch of submissions have been sparked by the
Church of Scientology. Some of the submissions that have been encouraged by the
Church of Scientology have some additional information as well. Then there are
what I would consider to be far more considered submissions. The submissions
from the Commissioner for Children and Young People, the Council of Official
Visitors, the Mental Health Law Centre and a variety of other organisations and
individuals fall into that latter category.
At the moment the Mental Health
Commission is going through every submission, line by line, identifying how
these recommendations can be accommodated, if in fact we want to accommodate
them. As long as the amendment in the draft bill is not a major rewrite, I
propose that the bill would then go through the process of going to cabinet,
getting approval to print and being brought into the Parliament. In that
process there would be additional opportunities for people to have input—for
example, to amend the bill. One of the opportunities that have been mentioned
is whether the bill should go to a committee. I am not necessarily in favour of
that, but that is one of the opportunities, I suppose. However, the other side
of that is that if, in considering all the submissions, the outcome is that I
believe the bill absolutely needs a rewrite, which I do not believe will be the
case, I would certainly consider that recommendation.
(1)–(2) I
think that I might have already made a comment about this when I made my
ministerial statement on the mental health bill. However, I am aware of the
recommendation from the commissioner. I have indicated that in the first
instance I want to assess the issues that have been raised by the submissions
that have come in. At the moment they are being put into three or four
different categories. A whole bunch of submissions have been sparked by the
Church of Scientology. Some of the submissions that have been encouraged by the
Church of Scientology have some additional information as well. Then there are
what I would consider to be far more considered submissions. The submissions
from the Commissioner for Children and Young People, the Council of Official
Visitors, the Mental Health Law Centre and a variety of other organisations and
individuals fall into that latter category.
At the moment the Mental Health
Commission is going through every submission, line by line, identifying how
these recommendations can be accommodated, if in fact we want to accommodate
them. As long as the amendment in the draft bill is not a major rewrite, I
propose that the bill would then go through the process of going to cabinet,
getting approval to print and being brought into the Parliament. In that
process there would be additional opportunities for people to have input—for
example, to amend the bill. One of the opportunities that have been mentioned
is whether the bill should go to a committee. I am not necessarily in favour of
that, but that is one of the opportunities, I suppose. However, the other side
of that is that if, in considering all the submissions, the outcome is that I
believe the bill absolutely needs a rewrite, which I do not believe will be the
case, I would certainly consider that recommendation.
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.