Page 2760 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 20 October 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR MOORE: Madam Speaker, it is also interesting to note that Mr Berry, in his response, suggested that in some way our recommendations would discriminate against those who cannot afford to purchase methadone at pharmacies. His recommendation is to bring in a method that charges everybody - - -
Mr Berry: No; untrue.
MR MOORE: How is that going to resolve the problem?
Mr Berry: Not true, Michael. Come on!
MR MOORE: With reference to urinalysis, Madam Speaker - - -
Mr Kaine: On a point of order, Madam Speaker: I heard the Minister a moment ago say that what Mr Moore said was not true. You made me withdraw a similar statement within the last few days.
Mr Berry: I withdraw.
Mr Kaine: I am merely seeking equality of treatment, Madam Speaker.
Mr Berry: Madam Speaker, I cannot win here. I say that it is not true and I have to withdraw. I say that it is true and I have to withdraw. I just withdraw. You cannot win.
MADAM SPEAKER: Mr Kaine, I assure you that equality of treatment will always be meted out. I uphold the point of order, and Mr Berry has withdrawn.
MR MOORE: It is a pity that Mr Berry did not withdraw himself, Madam Speaker, instead of just withdrawing what he had to say. The Minister tabled the government response to the report of the Select Committee on Drugs. On page 8 that response states:
The Select Committee Report vastly underestimates the complexity of staff-client relationships in the therapeutic settings such as the ACT Methadone Program. The ambiguities, contradictions and tensions surrounding methadone treatment are well documented in the literature and are not exclusive to the ACT Methadone Program.
The pressures of providing methadone treatment are frequently manifested as issues of control.
Madam Speaker, that is exactly what we understood, and that is exactly why we recommended a much broader system - so that the workers, who up till now have been put in a very difficult position, are no longer put in that position.
Mr Berry said that the committee report suggested that urinalysis was used only as a method of control. That was not the approach of the committee. When we dealt with urinalysis, we said that it should be agreed between doctor and patient as part of the normal doctor-patient relationship. The whole point of the report that we brought down, Madam Speaker, was to ensure a normal medical relationship and a normal medical duty of care. It is quite obvious from the very unfortunate deaths in Victoria that training has become an issue in methadone programs. Training is dealt with in our report, and it is an important issue. Nowhere is there any attempt to exclude training.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .