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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 14 Hansard (10 December) . . Page.. 4580 ..

MS FOLLETT (continuing):

When I first saw the Bills, I was inclined to oppose them. However, I am aware that this issue arose during a period of massive overcrowding at the Belconnen Remand Centre when detainees actually were sent to Goulburn Gaol and, on subsequent appeal to the courts, had to be brought back to the Belconnen Remand Centre because the courts held that the BRC administrator did not have the power to remove people interstate. I am concerned that overcrowding which gave rise to this whole Government legislation package has been a very serious issue at the Belconnen Remand Centre. We have debated that issue more than once. The facility, as we all know, is probably too old. It is not designed for current needs. Nevertheless, I am also aware that detainees at the Belconnen Remand Centre are severely disadvantaged during periods of overcrowding. I think that is something that members of the Assembly should take very seriously into account. While the Belconnen Remand Centre is overflowing, the detainees there do not have the kind of facilities and services which they have at other periods. In particular, they may have to sleep on the floor on a mattress. I can only imagine what it is like to be sleeping on a foam mattress on the floor of a concrete cell in the middle of winter, but it cannot be good. I cannot imagine myself enjoying that one little bit.

The detainees' visiting rights may be restricted because of the strain on staff caused by overcrowding and indeed also by budget constraints. There have been several periods when visitors' access to detainees has been severely curtailed, and I think that is a great disadvantage. It is also the case that during periods of overcrowding and staffing problems detainees often spend most of the day locked in their cells, so their periods of exercise and of other activities are severely curtailed.

Overcrowded conditions do have a very real and very negative effect on the detainees at the Belconnen Remand Centre. For that reason, I was prepared to consider the Government's legislation in a rather more kindly light. The alternatives that might be available within our Territory - for instance, the city watch-house and so on - are, if anything, rather more of a disadvantage to detainees than the overcrowded conditions at the Belconnen Remand Centre would be. I did inspect both facilities very closely, and I have to say that the remand facilities are pretty similar. The remandees in Goulburn actually have the option of working in one of the industrial settings there, although there is no compulsion for them to do so. They also face a major disadvantage in the distance from Canberra. Mr Speaker, I have circulated some amendments which I will speak on when I move them.

MS TUCKER (11.04): Basically, this Bill is about a short-term fix to a long-term problem of overcrowding in the Belconnen Remand Centre by making it administratively simpler to transfer a remandee from the Belconnen Remand Centre to the New South Wales system. The debate last week on the future of custodial facilities in the ACT has highlighted the need for an overall review and possibly a new facility for the ACT. There does seem to be general agreement in the Assembly that patching up the Remand Centre is not an appropriate longer-term option. While there will undoubtedly be debate on the most appropriate form and management of a new custodial facility, having consensus so far is a good start.

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