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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 13 Hansard (4 December) . . Page.. 4407 ..

Ms Horodny: Or pulling weeds.

MR MOORE: Or, as Ms Horodny interjects, pulling weeds. There are plenty of weeds in the ACT to pull. Mind you, when some people get stuck into blackberries or hawthorns or African boxthorns, it may be a significant penalty. Indeed, it may be a cruel and unnatural penalty. I think, Mr Speaker, there are issues that it is appropriate for us to discuss in a mature way, which, in many ways, ironically, this Assembly is very capable of doing. I think our focus has to be on the long-term goal of reintegration, if possible; of not taking somebody out of society when they need to be reintegrated.

There is one side issue that I would like to raise at this point, Mr Speaker. Mr Humphries has tabled this discussion paper, but only a few weeks ago the Chief Minister was talking about the possibility of negotiating to use Cooma Gaol. There seems to be a little conflict. I accept that this is a discussion paper and I accept that the Chief Minister did not make a commitment to Cooma.

Ms McRae: Not much.

MR MOORE: Well, that is my understanding; that there is no commitment. However, it should be part of the discussion as well. Whilst I think we have a great deal in common with Cooma, from the way I see things I think we would still create the problem of access for people. Ms Follett raised this really important issue about closeness to family and closeness to friends. For people in the unfortunate circumstances of being incarcerated, these issues are absolutely fundamental. They are critical. That is one of the things that we are doing very badly now. The sooner we can get through this important discussion and into action the better.

MS TUCKER (3.52): Mr Speaker, I also would like to congratulate members for the level of the discussion that we have had on this topic today. I particularly support what Ms Follett said in her speech. I think it was extremely well expressed.

I would like to mention something that members have not focused on, and I think it is equally important. My sister worked in Long Bay Gaol for some time as a physiotherapist and learnt the life stories of some of the people there. Having done so, she wondered how they could have ended up anywhere other than in gaol. She made it quite clear that the life stories of these people were such that they had very little choice but to end up being on the wrong side of the law. You have raised certain reasons for that. They may have an intellectual disability and they have not been properly supported. People who have been the victims of sexual abuse and other forms of abuse are very highly represented in our prisons as well.

I want to remind members that when the Social Policy Committee reported on the prevention of violence in schools we made these points about early intervention. We have to continually link that work. When we are looking at young children and then we look at the prisons, we have to continue to link this. What is clear from the evidence is that we have to get in early and support these kids. They are usually the victims of unfortunate circumstances. It is pretty clear very early on in their lives at school that they are kids at risk. If we as a society put in the effort to support these people when they are young, we will have less need for prisons in the long run.

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