More than a decade after the Burdekin inquiry found appalling shortcomings in mental health services in Australia, a Democrats-initiated Senate select committee inquiry examined the success of the National Mental Health Strategy, put in place after Burdekin.
The leader of the Australian Democrats and Chair of the Senate Inquiry into mental health services, Senator Lyn Allison, said that the inquiry, From Crisis to Community provided an opportunity to hear from people in the mental health sector who work with mental health issues every day - consumers, carers, health professionals and administrators.
Now a 2nd inquiry is underway for report by 26 June 2008. It seeks to look at:
| 1. |
Ongoing efforts towards improving mental health services in Australia, with reference to the National Action Plan on Mental Health agreed upon at the July 2006 meeting of the Council of Australian Governments, particularly examining the commitments and contributions of the different levels of government with regard to their respective roles and responsibilities. |
| 2. |
That the committee, in considering this matter, give consideration to: |
| |
a. |
the extent to which the action plan assists in achieving the aims and objectives of the National Mental Health Strategy; |
| |
b. |
the overall contribution of the action plan to the development of a coordinated infrastructure to support community-based care; |
| |
c. |
progress towards implementing the recommendations of the Select Committee on Mental Health, as outlined in its report A national approach to mental health – from crisis to community; and |
| |
d. |
identifying any possible remaining gaps or shortfalls in funding and in the range of services available for people with a mental illness. |
| 3. |
That the committee have access to, and have power to make use of, the evidence and records of the Select Committee on Mental Health. |
Up to date information on this inquiry is available at the Senate Committee webpage
From Crisis to Community
The inquiry conducted 17 days of formal public hearings covering every state and territory and received over 600 submissions and 10,000 pages of written material. Many people described the tragic outcome of a mental health system that failed them.
Submissions came from state, territory and local government, from peak mental health organisations, from consumers from doctors and nurses, from police and prison services and they told stories that provided the committee with a rich resource of material describing the complex system that is mental health in this country.
The Committee heard an enormous range of evidence on many different issues. A few key messages came through very clearly in the inquiry however:
> |
the system is grossly under funded, and |
> |
we need a fundamentally different approach to providing mental health care – one that is community not hospital-based and focused on promoting well-being and prevention and early intervention, rather than only treating people when they become seriously ill. |
The Committee made over a hundred recommendations many of which proposed a whole new approach to mental health. Copies of the two reports from the Inquiry can be found at the links below. The reports are intended to be read together.

|
First Report: all the evidence and the recommendations intended to inform the COAG process |

|
Second Report: the remainder of the recommendations |
CoAG’s National Action Plan on Mental Health – not good enough
Not long after the Committee published its first report, the then Prime Minister John Howard announced that the federal Government would spend an extra $1.9 billion over 5 years on mental health.
At the CoAG meeting in July 2006 the states outlined their plans for extra investment in mental health bringing the total up to almost $4 billion over 5 years.
Details of the Action Plan can be found here
http://www.coag.gov.au/meetings/140706/index.htm#mental
While the Democrats welcome new funds for mental health, there are many concerns about what has been announced:
> |
The spending will lift mental health’s share of total health spending in Australia but is still only 2/3 of what has been called for (an extra $3 - $6 billion a year by 2012). |
> |
There is no coherent framework to the initiatives announced. It appears to be more patchy, ad hoc programs that will be available only to those fortunate enough to be within the purview of the successful grant applicant. |
> |
There is no link to the National Mental Health Strategy (NMHS) or commitment to measuring the effectiveness of the NMHS, targets or timelines. Instead there is only talk of the 4 outcomes mentioned in this new action plan. |
> |
There is no independent oversight of progress on the NMHS or of progress on any new action plan. |
> |
There is no right to access services for people with a mental illness. |
> |
The is no commitment to the development of multidisciplinary, community based primary mental health centres, or of specialised services for young people, the aged and those with dual diagnosis. |
> |
Services will continue to be fragmented and opportunities lost for developing expertise through teams of mental health workers without structural change to our primary mental health services. |
> |
There is no commitment to demographic fairness in access, meaning people living in the country will continue to receive fewer services than their metropolitan counterparts. |
> |
And there is a real danger of more of the ‘tough on drugs’ approach which has been shown not to work and risks blaming people with mental illness for their condition. |
The Federal Government is required to respond to the reports of Senate inquiries but this may take some time.
In the meantime, the Democrats will continue to press for a more holistic, cooperative, better funded approach to mental health services otherwise the work done so far may be wasted.
We encourage individuals, carers, non-government organisations, doctors and all those with an interest in improving mental health services, to use the report of this inquiry as a resource and a tool with which to press for reform. |