Stewart Barbara: Mental Health Commission Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Stewart Barbara: Mental Health Commission Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:641;Page:11003] 
BARBARA STEWART (NZ First) 
: 
 On behalf of New Zealand First I rise to support the third reading of the Mental Health Commission Amendment Bill. As others have outlined the purpose of this bill is basically to extend the term of the commission to 2015 and to make some amendments to the commission’s role. New Zealand First believes that these are very positive steps forward for the mental health sector. There is a role in New Zealand for the Mental Health Commission and it is a very valuable one. 
We in New Zealand First are aware that the demand for mental health services increased dramatically after the very successful television campaign that starred John Kirwan. This campaign would not have occurred without the assistance or the support of the Mental Health Commission. More people now are aware of depression. They now know what they can do and most important who they can go to for assistance. That was outlined in an article in the  
New Zealand Herald 
. It reported that since the advertisements were run a ministry helpline was fielding between 50 and 300 calls a day from people who were concerned about their mental health. That was a very significant step forward. It was an excellent initiative that has helped to destigmatise a condition that many New Zealanders suffer from. 
In New Zealand First we were pleased to see that the life of the commission is to be extended to 2015. We believe that the commission will now be able to plan the most effective ways to get the greatest benefits for service users and the mental health sector. We believe that in 2015 there should be a thorough review of the commission so that we can be sure it has achieved the objectives it set. We know it is very difficult to implement anything of any great weight with a 3-year deadline looming over the head of any commission and we know too that uncertainty does not produce a results-orientated culture or organisation. 
The longer term the commission now has gives it an opportunity to liaise with parent groups and to solve the apparent conflict that has arisen between these two groups. We heard about that during the select committee process. The commission does need to work with parents if it is to be successful in its function as stated in the bill of advocating for the interests of people with mental illness and their families. It is not good enough for any commission to be at variance with parents who are one of the most important interest groups. 
It was a real concern that during the submission process and afterwards parents said they could get absolutely nowhere with the commission. They said the commission was ideologically captured to the extent that it believed everyone was able to recover from a mental illness and that all mental health patients could live quite successfully in the community or at home with their families. We were given examples that were very sad. Some people were actually living in fear for their own safety. Their lives had been totally altered by a family member who had a mental illness. The commission’s statement to parents that recovery from severe mental illness is possible was not assisting them in any way. There are a lot of tragic examples which we read about in the newspapers—fortunately not regularly—of mental health patients who have created havoc in the community and at home and are not aware of what they have done or even why they have done it. So it is sad. 
We believe it is absolutely essential that the Mental Health Commission reassesses its role with this very important stakeholder group and realises that really parents are working at the forefront and coping every single day in a very stressful and quite lonely environment. We do not believe that parents’ views can be dismissed as lightly as they have been in the past nor can their concerns. New Zealand First looks forward to the commission rectifying the situation that has developed and we believe it should be a very high priority. It has time to put it right and it does need to do so. 
Perhaps the commission could be proactive on this front and involve a parent representative. Other organisations have parent representatives and there is no real reason why the Mental Health Commission should not. There does need to be somebody who can advocate for parent’s interests and who understand the stresses and strains parents have as they cope on a daily basis. We will be very interested to see what occurs as the bottom line is that a Government commission cannot work in isolation and on a totally different tangent from one of its important stakeholder groups. So we will be looking forward to some improved feedback on this aspect of the commission’s work. 
The growth of various addictions in the community is a challenge and those issues are increasing. Along with the latest addiction of telephoning psychics to hear what the day may hold there are gambling and alcohol issues so the range of addictions is expanding quite rapidly. An addiction advisory group and even perhaps an addiction commissioner now may be able to be considered in light of the longer term that the commission actually has. 
Like many others in this House I must say that I have appreciated the work the Mental Health Commission has assisted with: the confidential forum for former inpatients of psychiatric hospitals; its comments earlier in the year on acknowledging the high level of risk of electroconvulsive therapy as a treatment; its call to protect the rights of mental health service users; and the call for advanced directives where people can specify what treatments they do want and what they do not want to receive in the event that they become incompetent. So some good work has been completed. 
We believe there is a very important role for the Mental Health Commission and it is essential that it meets the many functions that are directly attributed to it and most important that it does not isolate any of the stakeholder groups. It is only by working together that it will achieve the most for all its stakeholders. So New Zealand First is supporting this bill and we look forward to further developments in this very important mental health area.