Robertson Grant: Crown Entities Reform Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Robertson Grant: Crown Entities Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 May 2012. Volume:680;Page:2348. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
GRANT ROBERTSON (Deputy Leader—Labour) 
: 
 Mr Chair I am sure you will call other Labour members as well in the near future. I was not quite aware of that other member seeking the call.  
Part 2 of the Crown Entities Reform Bill as my colleague Kris Faafoi was just saying represents a part that the Labour Party cannot support. One of the things I just want to talk about is the Mental Health Commission and its role—and I am sure other colleagues will want to talk about this as well—and the question of independence and independent leadership within the health sector and particularly within mental health. As has been discussed by other speakers mental health issues in New Zealand are dealt with at a number of levels in the health system and in a number of ways. What the Mental Health Commission has been able to do is provide an independent voice provide independent leadership and provide the monitoring of mental health activities which I believe is at risk with this proposal from the Government.  
The proposal from the Government to locate a Mental Health Commissioner within the Health and Disability Commissioner’s office is going to provide the commissioner with some positive links with other parts of the quality and regulatory monitoring part of the health system. But the trade-off with doing that is a trade-off away from the independence of the Mental Health Commission away from the focus— 
Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman 
: Rubbish! 
GRANT ROBERTSON 
: The Minister of State Services says “Rubbish!”. Well the Minister could get up to take a call and tell us how he will be ensuring that the Mental Health Commission’s independent leadership is now going to continue on within this structure. Because that is the fear that many in the sector have—that the independent leadership will have gone.  
The Mental Health Commission has over the years challenged institutions within the health system as to whether they are performing their role properly and whether they are actually implementing the blueprint. Is that going to be able to carry on with someone now within the Health and Disability Commissioner’s office with somebody who is now a deputy commissioner within that office? People who came and submitted to the Government Administration Committee made it clear that that was their concern. They could live with this change but asked whether the Mental Health Commission’s independent role would be able to be carried on under this change. I do not believe that at this point in time we have had anything from the Government to indicate that that would be the case.  
Blueprint II is being worked on and that is good and it is positive. We always felt that the Mental Health Commission would have the role of getting that going. But what we now have is a situation where many in the sector believe that the focus on the implementation and monitoring of Blueprint II is at risk with this proposal. This is a vital transition point in the way that mental health funding and mental health support is provided in New Zealand. At that very point the question is whether the Minister is saying to this House: “We can get that implemented. We can ensure that the monitoring is going to occur. We can ensure that the linkages between the provision of services and mental health policy are going to be able to carry on.” I do not believe in the bill’s current form that that is going to happen. I do not want to overdramatise this. I think it is clear that the Government has tried to come up with a way of continuing on with mental health monitoring and the provision of policy advice and services around mental health. But I do think this is the wrong way to go about getting the outcomes that we want for the new blueprint for mental health.  
Some of the other ideas which the Minister may choose to comment on that were raised in the select committee include the role of mental health service consumers in being able to have some input into the future provision of monitoring and services around mental health issues. Overall in New Zealand over the last 4 years we have seen a number of district health boards decide where they are going to go to find the funding cuts that have been forced on them by this Government and that is in the area of mental health. Certainly in my own area that is what the Capital and Coast District Health Board has done.  
The providers of mental health services in the community have had their budgets cut. Wellink one of the providers of services to mental health consumers in the Capital and Coast District Health Board region has had its funding cut by over a third. It is continuing to deliver the services. The Government is very lucky that many of the service providers in the mental health sector are so dedicated that they will keep delivering services. But the question that has to be asked is this: what will it mean in an environment where district health boards forced by the underfunding of this Government have made a decision to take cuts in mental health with the Mental Health Commission going out of existence? Will the Mental Health Commission’s successor this person who is now the deputy commissioner be able to actually provide a challenge to what is going on in our district health boards around New Zealand right now? Will they be standing up to the institutions that manage and control mental health and will they actually provide the advocacy for and the promotion of mental health and the linkages between policy and services? We do not know that. We have not had a convincing answer from this Government. It does give people in the sector the impression that once again mental health is being pushed to the side.  
Once again mental health is the poor cousin in the health sector. The Government could have carried on the Mental Health Commission carried on its mandate ensured that Blueprint II got fully up and running and then made its decision about whether or not it wanted to carry on with the commission. Instead it brings the date forward and puts into play risk and a lack of confidence within the sector. So I am going to end my contribution there— 
Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman 
: Great! 
GRANT ROBERTSON 
: Well I hope the Minister takes a call. I hope the Minister will take a call and answer the concerns of New Zealanders as to whether or not his Government is really committed to mental health. The question he needs to answer beyond the ones about the structure is whether this Government is prepared to fund mental health in a way that gives it the prominence that it deserves in our community and our society because it has not done so up to now.