Page 2779 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 20 October 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mrs Carnell: If they all applied they would have one client each, or two.
MR BERRY: Thank you. It is not so much focused on improving the system of methadone distribution in a well-regulated environment. The proposal that methadone treatment should be available from community pharmacies as well as government facilities pays scant regard, as I said earlier, to the need for such a program to be viable and ignores the financial impact the proposed privatisation will have on the provision of these services. I am deeply disappointed that Mr Moore has adopted the privatisation model. I am glad that he is on side with the Liberals on this, as that sets him well apart from us. Privatisation of services will not ensure that a high standard of treatment is delivered to all clients; nor will it achieve even the most basic objective of the service, of increased access at affordable prices.
The amendment would allow the pharmacies to provide methadone without any regulatory mechanisms in place to ensure that these services also had the expertise and the resources to provide ongoing clinical and personal support. There is no in-depth thinking about how quality standards can be maintained and monitored over time.
Mrs Carnell: There is a whole professional code of ethics.
MR BERRY: There is none. The amendment is fundamentally flawed because it does not provide for the implementation of the national guidelines for methadone programs. These guidelines have been developed by experts drawn from all over Australia under the auspices of the Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy and they were endorsed by Mr Humphries.
Mrs Carnell's proposal flouts these guidelines by proposing a broader spread of distribution points while appearing to have no regard for the underlying premise of the guidelines, which is that the safety and care of the client is paramount. Routine inspection of handling, storage and documentation procedures for the administration of methadone is not an adequate response to the need to monitor quality of standards. Without the development of proper planning controls which take into account the location of existing services and residential requirements, service provision will be ad hoc and the needs of clients and the local community will suffer.
Mr De Domenico: This is a group which has a 90 per cent credibility rating in comparison to your 10 per cent.
MR BERRY: And falling. Under Mrs Carnell's proposal access to pharmacies will be determined by the capacity of clients to pay for treatment at rates set by pharmacies. She makes no apology for it. In reality, Madam Speaker, the proposal would result in services with the potential to treat clients at very different stages of treatment and no capacity to attend to the overall clinical management needs of clients. Therefore, I must reiterate, Madam Speaker, that it is for the above reasons that the Government will be opposing the proposal put forward by Mrs Carnell.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill agreed to in principle.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .