TG questions GSD’s approach to mental health proposal, but urges ‘calm discussion’ first
Together Gibraltar has said it is willing to engage with the Government and the GSD on the issue of mental health, even as it questioned the manner in which the latter raised the issue and called for cross-party support.
This comes after the GSD called for the creation of a cross-party parliamentary select committee as a mechanism to discuss and drive forward reforms on the issue.
In a statement Together Gibraltar said it is the first to advocate for cross party collaboration, adding that it shares the GSD’s concern for the mental health of the community.
But, it added: “All of these issues should be discussed calmly and at length in private before launching public proposals.”
The party lambasted the way the GSD had presented its proposal “to the press and to the different parties simultaneously”, asserting that the parties should have been consulted before the press.
“Otherwise potentially constructive proposals like the above end up having the appearance of devious political manoeuvring, thus detracting from the possibility of their success,” its statement read.
The party added: “Cross party initiatives -which Together Gibraltar has always supported – without real political consensus on the issues can often be a waste of time.”
“Before any committee is created, all three parties should meet and discuss whether this consensus is possible and how it will be implemented.”
Out of the all the possible areas of collaboration, mental health is perhaps the most overarching and complex, Together Gibraltar said.
“We can agree on improving our response to the problem, but on how to tackle the root we will probably be at loggerheads over the most essential elements of our respective ideologies.”
“If we cannot agree on the politics (the root of the problem and the issues that generate it), then all this select committee will be doing is discussing funding and how to best respond to a problem that already exists.”
“In terms of funding, we are more than happy to support an increase in funding to tackle this extremely worrying problem.”
“However, on the more scientific issues, would it not be better to create a panel of expert doctors? Should politicians intrude in what is essentially the job of properly trained medical professionals?”