Skip to playerSkip to main content
  • 7 weeks ago
WATCH: NSW Mental Health Minister Rose Jackson is questioned by Greens MP Amanda Cohn during budget estimates.
Transcript
00:00Minister, I have some questions about the Albury-Widonga Regional Hospital Project
00:04lived-in-living experience consumer working group, and I'll seek to table the terms of
00:08reference for that group, and I have a copy so that you can refer to the document as well.
00:12So while that's being done, the Royal Commission into Victoria's mental health system found
00:18that involvement from individuals with lived-in-living experience must not be tokenistic or constrained
00:23by institutional agendas, and it issued warnings against processes that engage consumers just
00:28to validate predetermined outcomes.
00:30The Productivity Commission inquiry into mental health found that consumers only being included
00:35where they agree with existing system priorities creates distrust and disengagement.
00:41Noting those findings, these terms of reference for the lived-experience working group for
00:47the Albury-Widonga Hospital redevelopment, and that's being run by New South Wales Health
00:50Infrastructure, include prerequisites and requirements that participation is at the invitation of
00:57Albury-Widonga Health. Participants must agree to commit to promoting awareness and understanding
01:02of the project's benefits. They must obtain authorisation from the project team member leading
01:08the activities prior to publicly discussing any matters relating to those activities.
01:13They must acknowledge and understand that Albury-Widonga Health reserves the right at their discretion
01:17to withdraw the invitation to participate in the working group, and they must acknowledge that
01:21information discussed in the meetings is confidential. In your view, are those requirements for
01:28lived-experience participants in this process in keeping with best practice?
01:32Yeah, I mean, look, I have to say, obviously, Dr Kohn, this is the first time that I've
01:36seen this information. I don't pretend to be across the terms of reference for the Albury-Widonga
01:42Regional Hospital lived-and-living-experience consumer working group prior to you bringing them to my
01:46attention. The principles that you outlined in relation to best practice for lived-experience
01:53engagement I am familiar with and do think are important. Yes, at first blush, I would say that
01:59some of these provisions do appear to be quite restrictive and perhaps not necessarily in keeping
02:06with the principles that you have correctly identified as being consistent with best practice.
02:12So, but that would be a very sort of initial assessment. I would say that those best practice
02:19principles in relation to lived-experience engagement are consistent with the analyses that was done in
02:26relation to the Towards Zero Suicides programs and other programs that New South Wales Health has run,
02:32where we have done analysis and evaluations of those programs, and they have also identified
02:37those kinds of principles as being at the basis of good, of best practicing of engagement with lived-experience.
02:44So, I'm committed to those and happy to take on a little bit of a deeper look at the documentation
02:50that you've provided, but I accept your point that some of that seems a bit restrictive.
02:54Thank you, and look, I appreciate your comment that you're willing to take a look at it. In particular,
02:59this provision to remove people from the working group.
03:02Do you know whether that's happened, Dr. Kahn, or...?
03:05That was going to be one of my questions.
03:07Right, okay. I don't know whether that's happened. So, I mean, I'm happy to take on notice whether
03:11that's happened. And I accept, yes, I mean, if it has happened because people have spoken publicly or
03:19been critical or, you know, something along those lines that the people convening the working group,
03:25you know, didn't think was, didn't appreciate, then, you know, I accept your point that in that
03:32circumstance, that would seem problematic to me. I don't know whether that's occurred. And if you
03:36don't, I can take it on notice and provide you with information.
03:39I don't. And certainly, this has been brought to my attention by people with lived experience
03:42in the region who don't want to participate in this lived experience working group under these
03:48conditions.
03:48Yes, sure. Understood. And it's good feedback to hear that. And, you know, look,
03:54we can, yeah, I mean, as I said, we will take on notice that the detail here and any specific
04:01examples that we're able to ascertain and perhaps talk to you about how we can ensure that people
04:07who have lived experience, whose voices we want to hear, are welcome as part of the working group.
04:12Thank you. My related question about the Albury-Wodonga health redevelopment, which again,
04:18it's big, it's cross-border health service, but the redevelopment is being managed by New South
04:21Wales health infrastructure. They're currently proposing the inpatient mental health facility
04:28at level six of the multi-storey building without any access to green space. Are you aware that back
04:34in 2021, there was co-design work undertaken for an upgraded version of our Nolan House inpatient
04:41facility, which envisioned a standalone mental health facility consistent with sort of newer best
04:49practice facilities such as at Dubbo, Hornsby, others in the Murrumbi GLHD?
04:55Look, I have to say I'm not familiar with the 2021 project or piece of work that you have referred to.
05:04I am familiar with the proposition that Nolan House would be delivered on level six of the new hospital.
05:14I mean, I'm advised that there are a few reasons for that. Just to be clear, there will be no,
05:22I'm advised there will be no other patients or health services delivered on level six that it will be
05:29exclusively for mental health consumers. And that in terms of green space that there is intended to be
05:37an open courtyard. I mean, again, I don't know the exact design of that courtyard and the green space within
05:43it. But specifically, Dr. Conn, I've been advised that one of the reasons for that is that that is the only
05:50facility or area within the redevelopment where the open space is not overlooked by other health facilities.
05:59So previously, I understand the site on level one, the courtyard, the open space could be overlooked
06:08by others. And, you know, there are obviously privacy concerns. And, you know, to be honest,
06:15we don't want other health patients and consumers gawking at mental health consumers as they use their outdoor space.
06:22And that the decision to have the site on level six and the courtyard there so they could not be
06:28overlooked was for that reason. But look, that's just the advice I've received. I have to say,
06:33that did not refer to work that was done in 2021 that may have provided alternative options.
06:40So you'll have to let me just take that element on notice. Thank you. I'd be delighted to provide
06:45you with a copy of the 2021 clinical services plan if you're interested. In terms of the advice you're
06:50being given about what alternatives are, I mean, this is a redevelopment that has been significantly
06:56pared back value managed by health infrastructure to fit within the funding envelope that was allocated
07:01by the previous government, it actually wasn't by your government. So I suppose the challenge I would
07:07leave you with is, or the question on notice is, were all options considered for delivery of a standalone
07:14best practice mental health unit? Is it the value management or the funding constraints that have
07:19resulted in a suboptimal solution on level six? Yes, as I said, I will take that on notice. I'm not sure
07:26why those decisions were made and the basis for them, but I'm happy to take that on notice and try
07:32and provide you with some additional information. Thank you. I had a couple of
Be the first to comment
Add your comment

Recommended