27 upvotes, 2 direct replies (showing 2)
View submission: Roger Cook promises to make kindergarten full-time in State election push
But Mr Cook heaped doubt on the centrepiece of the Liberal policy, to trial speech pathology services in primary schools, insisting long wait lists won’t be solved by funding. “It’s not for a lack of money, it’s for a lack of workforce,” he said.
I think that actually valid criticism, for a policy that's actually really well meaning and one that would be an efficient use of taxpayer funds.
Who knew that the Liberal Party was capable of proposing a well-meaning policy? But what Faragher said is self contradictory.
“The advice that I have received talking to many people, including Speech Pathology Australia . . . they believe that there is capacity to do that.
I'm not really sure how she can be confident of that and then turn around and say:
primary school aged children are waiting nearly two years to see a paediatrician, nearly two years to see a clinical psychologist and **over 10 months to see a speech pathologist**
I'm willing to bet that we also don't have a full idea of what the scope of the problem is, however early intervention is always better.
Comment by Otherwise_Window at 03/02/2025 at 06:31 UTC
10 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Who knew that the Liberal Party was capable of proposing a well-meaning policy?
They aren't. Poorer schools won't be able to have an onsite speech pathologist, there really is a shortage of them, and with child development support being devolved to schools poor kids will have no access at all.
The waiting lists for paediatricians are also because of the number of people who waste paediatricians' time. Some people think you need to take a child to a paediatrician for literally every childhood illness or doctor's visit. (You don't. That's what GPs are for.)
Comment by Wide_Confection1251 at 03/02/2025 at 04:55 UTC
7 upvotes, 0 direct replies
The Libs policy for school based child development allied health is ripped straight out of the in-train NDIS reforms and foundational supports proposals.
Which is neither new nor costed out and ofc the Speechy Association is gonna say more work/funding for their members is good.
The NDIS' administering agency sponsors a lot of interesting research in the early childhood space currently as there's a lack of meaningful data. They're aware that more place based and localised services is better than the current way of doing things.
Generally speaking, though, there is support for early intervention - hence why their developmental delay criteria are fairly loose.
Also I strongly suspect they're floating this policy idea as a not so subtle hint about their plans for federally funded supports in general (cut it and push it back onto the states).