Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 2 Hansard (27 February) . . Page.. 359 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

It is interesting that 29 out of the 30 members of the task force have come to this way of thinking, having gone through a huge number of arguments presented to them by the community.

In conclusion, let me say that this research project is an academic exercise. It is an exercise about looking into areas where we do not have knowledge, and that is fraught with difficulty. (Extension of time granted) It is incumbent upon us to accept that this is a scientific trial. We are talking about allowing our scientists to examine a new field of knowledge. That is what academics should be about. That is what we need to recognise this trial for, and that is why it is that we should give the encouragement and the room for Dr Bammer and her team at the Australian Institute of Criminology and the National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health to proceed with this trial on a national basis, as Ms Follett said, with support from our Federal colleagues and State colleagues through the Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy.

MR BERRY (4.45): As the Leader of the Opposition said, this matter was first raised by Labor with the Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy. It has always been discussed between Health Ministers. At the outset of the discussion it was very clear to me, at least, that we were a long way off convincing Ministers from all around the country. As time passes people will become more receptive to the idea; but I rather suspect that, before the first prescription of heroin is made out, many of us will be long gone from this place. That does not mean that you should stop, because I think this is a job that will take some time.

I have always been of the view that it was not something that the ACT was able to carry by itself, either financially or in the spotlight for the rest of the country - indeed, the rest of the world - to focus on. I take the view that this infant self-government will take some time to earn the respect of other places on a whole range of issues; but, if it comes to this particular one, it will be even more difficult for us to do so.

Mr Humphries was critical, across the floor, about where Labor stood in relation to this issue and was trumpeting his desire for bipartisanship. When it comes to setting standards of bipartisanship, who set the standard across the board? We set the standard on this issue because we were the first to take it to the Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy. We still expect that that process has a long way to run. It will have its hurdles, because from time to time throughout the country governments will change and the philosophies of governments will change.

One of the great problems that I have with the Liberals pursuing this issue at a national level is that here they are not united on the issue. It is all right for Mr Humphries to say that the Liberal Party profits from their divided interests on this issue. Nobody would accept that. If you are not able to push a particular issue with a united team behind you, it becomes much harder. It is very clear that the Liberals are not united on this; in fact, they are clearly divided on it. That will be a problem for Mrs Carnell when it comes to negotiating this issue at a Federal level. "How strong is the ACT Government on this issue?", I think Ministers from other places will say. Of course, they have a right to say that, because they are the ones that are going to be asked to make a moral and financial investment in progressing this issue.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .