Psychiatrists have welcomed additional investment in mental health services but are warning that the government’s $100 million package of proposed solutions may fall short of addressing the system’s underlying pressures and could risk introducing new inefficiencies or unintended consequences if not carefully implemented.
Mental Health Minister Matt Doocey has outlined how the $100 million allocated in the 2026 Budget under Vote Health will be spent, as scrutiny continues over whether the funding will deliver tangible improvements in a stretched mental health system.
The funding package will be directed toward a mix of targeted initiatives, including support services for new mothers, additional inpatient mental health beds, the training and deployment of new psychology assistants, and funding for community-based mental health organisations already working on the frontline.
The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists has welcomed the additional funding but raised questions about whether it is proportionate to the scale of need in the mental health system, noting that a full assessment is difficult without more complete data.
The College also highlighted concerns that, in the absence of a comprehensive long-term national mental health strategy, the new spending risks being piecemeal rather than part of a coordinated system-wide plan.
According to Dr Hiran Thabrew, chair of Tū Te Akaaka Roa, a lack of reliable information is one of the sector’s biggest ongoing challenges, making it difficult to properly assess needs and plan effective mental health services.
The last comprehensive adult mental health and addiction prevalence survey was carried out more than 20 years ago, while a child and adolescent study commissioned by the current government is still yet to be completed. This raised ongoing questions about how well policy is being informed by up-to-date data.
Thabrew said the sector needs to start with accurate, up-to-date data on population needs, then use that information to redesign mental health and addiction services accordingly. From there, he argues, policymakers should determine the workforce required to deliver those services and ensure enough training and capacity-building is in place to meet demand.
He also added that the way decisions are currently being made in the mental health sector appears piecemeal.
“These decisions are being made somewhat reactively and in response to lobbying, rather than in a transparent, planned and equitable manner.”
“It’s not always about needing more, but about making sure the money goes to the right places and that they’re delivering what is needed.”
Thabrew said it is positive that funding will expand peer support within maternal mental health services.
“Maternal mental health resources have been chronically under-resourced,” he said.
“It’s been difficult, particularly for women who’ve been experiencing more serious or complex needs, to access specialist care and for a very small number to access inpatient treatment through mother and baby sessions, where they don’t lose contact with their child.”
“For those groups with greater need, that peer support funding will not replace what they do need. A different kind of funding is needed for specialist mental health clinicians, who are trained in supporting them with talking therapies and medication.”
The planned introduction of up to three nights of postnatal hospital care for new mothers could be beneficial in supporting early recovery, including helping with breastfeeding, bonding, and managing postnatal stress.
However, he cautions that this measure is unlikely to address more serious mental health conditions, which often emerge in the days or weeks following birth and require longer-term, specialised care.
Another issue with large funding announcements in mental health is workforce capacity: if there are not enough trained clinicians, nurses, and support staff to deliver newly funded services, staff inpatient beds, and train new workers, then some of the allocated funding may ultimately go unspent despite being committed on paper.
There is a strong public expectation that mental health requires ongoing, meaningful action rather than short-term or isolated interventions.
“From our perspective, it means we do have to move beyond these short-term or piecemeal kinds of measures or funding towards consistent, long-term planning to build and support the mental health system.”