The Mental Health Coordinating Council has been analysing the mental health policies of the major parties in the run-up to the NSW election (at least those released so far).
Thanks to Tully Rosen, the Council’s policy and research officer, and his colleagues for providing this summary.
Tully Rosen and colleagues write:
MHCC has gathered the details from the specific mental health policies announced by the major parties for the NSW election. Although the Greens have a mental health policy listed on their website, as far as we are aware they have made no specific program announcements. As usual, the funding directed by both major parties specifically to community managed organisations is only a fraction of the total new funds promised for mental health.
Liberal/National
• Establish a Mental Health Commission ($30mil)
This Commission will have full responsibility for mental health budget which will be quarantined. It will be able to focus resources on where they are needed and on the most appropriate models of care. The legislation to establish the Commission will be developed by a specially appointed working group. The Commission will have three specialist units to: manage the experience of patients and carers; divert mental health patients away from the prison system; and help ensure a smooth operation of the Mental Health Review Tribunal
• Extra funding for LifeLine ($8mil over 4 years)
• For telephone and counselling services
Highlights for Community Managed Organisations – The proposed Mental Health Commission and quarantining of mental health funding will potentially be a good thing in the face of all the other health changes such as new local health areas and the ever present temptation to use mental health funding for other services. How funds for CMOs are quarantined or managed will need to be worked out. Funding for Lifeline is the only specific program or CMO mentioned (so far). All up extra for CMOs is $8mil over 4 years.
***
Labor
• New public perinatal mental health service ($29.6mil over 4 years). This includes a new 8 bed mother and baby inpatient unit (location to be determined) and an expanded maternity and post-natal home visit program to support mothers at risk of post-natal depression.
• Doubling HASI (Housing and Accommodation Support Initiative) ($20.8mil over 4 years). Extra 1,100 places but no indication of support level mix or target groups
• Setting up Assertive Community Response teams ($14mil over 4 years). Three pilot sites in Western Sydney, the Hunter and the Illawarra to deliver “community based” mental health interventions for children and adolescents. Family and Carer Mental Health Program extra funding ($8mil over 4 years). Extra funds for NGOs to provide these services
• Expanding the number of Declared Mental Health Facilities throughout rural and regional NSW ($5.92mil over 4 years)
• Mental health research ($5mil over 4 years). $500K each year for leading schizophrenia researcher Prof Cyndi Shannon Weickert and $3mil to set up a Mental Health Clinical Academic Research Program
• Expanding specialist Older Persons Mental Health Unit in the Hunter ($3mil)
• Continuing beyond blue national depression initiative in NSW funding for another year ($1.2mil)
• Expanding inpatient mental health infrastructure
• A new Psychiatric Emergency Care Centre (PECC) at Blacktown Hospital
• A Safe Assessment Room at Mt Druitt Hospital
• A 20-bed sub-acute unit at Wyong Hospital
• An additional 70 beds at Campbelltown Hospital and new mental health services as part of the Liverpool Hospital redevelopment
Highlights for Community Managed Organisations – The major item for CMOs is the doubling of the HASI packages to 2,200. HASI is an effective program and its expansion is a good thing. The other main item for CMOs is the extra funding for the Family and Carer Mental Health Program. Beyond blue depression initiative is the only CMO specifically mentioned with this program being renewed for another year. Total extra funding announced for CMOs is $30mil over 4 years.
4 Comments
Murf
The MH Commission proposed by Lib/Nats sounds promising, but it would be good to know what sort of staffing they propose and how much salaries for them will cost; how often will they meet, what targets will they monitor, who do they believe will give the best value services to the various diagnostic groups (social workers, psychologists, family therapists, psychiatrists)? The rest of their plan sounds too vague to comment on.
The Labor proposals are nicely detailed although they don’t state what sort of personnel will be providing services under the funded programs. I don’t like the idea that a specific researcher gets a great lump of funds they haven’t competed for on the open market, no matter how innovative or promising the program so far. Other researchers who compete for ARC and NHMRC money will be put offside! Better to provide salary and facilities for some research officers to be employed while directed by senior personnel already in NSW Mental Health. The Beyond Blue extension doesn’t sound enough to be meaningful since it must cover admin, communications, mental health workers and possible security- 12 months psychiatrist salary takes $250 000 already! The wonderful funding for the mothers/bubs program will have to be carefully allocated across buildings and staff as buildings cost a fortune- usually a lot more than first quoted for, especially when its all custom designed and built, not a couple of project homes cobbled together! I like the Labor proposals better than Libs, but it would help people deeply concerned about making the most of funds to see even more details and any flexibility with funds and personnel that may be shared with other health sub-sectors.
Melissa Sweet
Sally Rose, Blogger-in-Chief, Global Access Partners, asked me to post this comment on her behalf:
Not working in the field I am only able to judge the relative merits of those lists by tallying the numbers. Painting a rough picture of a $38million + commitment from Lib/Nats VS a $79.52Million + commitment from Labor.
Given that spending twice as much doesn’t always produce twice as much benefit, and given that there is never enough money in the budget for every worthy initiative to receive funding I’d like to pose a hypothetical question.
Let’s imagine the funding commitments were met halfway and the Mental Health Coordinating Council was given the opportunity to outline how to spend $60million on improving mental health services in Australia how would you advocate spending it?
jass
At the moment, Western Australia is the only state with a mental health commission. Having been involved in the process – for a part of it anyway – my impression is that there are aspects of it which are quite promising. The old way of doing things in mental health is simply not working, and it is time to start something new. But in WA the commission does not have a legislative basis and the primary motivation is the government’s ‘markets are everything’ philosophy. so the commission becomes a market mechanisms, effectively, and a body that purchases services from mental health providers. the purchaser/provider relationship is thereby sharply divided.
Tully Rosen
Hi Sally,
As we outline in our “Call to Action” position paper, there are a number of high-priority and cost effective programs that could be immediately invested in that would provide substantial benefit to people living with mental illness in NSW. To date, Labor has been more financially supportive of our identified priority areas, while the Coalition has committed to overdue broad structural reform. Neither is anywhere near enough.
Our greatest concern, along with many many others in the mental health sector, remains that mental health overall is grossly underfunded – NSW remains around the bottom of the rankings for spending on mental health, for the percentage of mental health funding allocated to community mental health, and for the percentage of mental health funding allocated to NGOs. We need to be talking billions of dollars.