Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 7 Hansard (24 June) . . Page.. 1973 ..
MR STEFANIAK (continuing):
But it depends on the type of access and, fundamentally, of course, just the needs of the child. But, in instances, certainly, assistance is given in terms of transportation, and in more difficult cases there is supervised access actually at something like the Family Services office, with a member of staff there at all times. It does vary from case to case.
MS REILLY: Mr Speaker, I actually asked about children who needed to be transported, not about ones who are met at Family Services. Is it true that Aerial Taxis delivers these children like parcels to a location and no-one has any idea whether or not they reach the right location?
MR STEFANIAK: Ms Reilly, if you have any instances of that, where people are treated like parcels and there is a problem, I would suggest that you let me know. I have already indicated that, certainly over the period we have been in government, there have been a couple of instances where people have had problems in terms of transportation. That is something that we look into. So, if there is any problem with Aerial cabs being used and people being taken to the wrong place, or if there is a lack of supervision and there is some problem there, if you have any specific instances, please let me know about them.
MR OSBORNE: Mr Speaker, my question is to the Minister for Police - or the pretend Minister for Police, because the real Minister for Police is up on the hill. Anyway, my question is to our Minister for Police down here, Mr Humphries. Minister, do you - as this person, the Minister for Police - support the establishment of a shooting gallery for heroin addicts? Have you had any discussions with the AFP and the AFPA regarding this issue, as their Minister?
MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, let me say that the issue of a so-called shooting gallery is a very difficult and complex issue, which members of this place will have seen debated from time to time in public places, most recently in the report of the Wood royal commission in New South Wales. They will be aware that it is a sensitive issue, which needs to be carefully and sensitively canvassed around our community. It is very easy for us to jump on a bandwagon and beat up an issue in a way which alarms the rest of the community. I would like to think nobody in this place was in that boat, but I cannot really say that I am confident of that.
The ACT Government is committed to the harm minimisation approach to the use of illicit drugs. We realise that there is a variety of methods of dealing with the harm done by drugs in the community. There is also an approach which emphasises the use of abstinence as the key tool to prevent the harm that drugs do to our community. If you seek my personal view, Mr Osborne, I have long been on the record as saying that I do not believe that the abstinence approach - the end all trade in drugs approach - works. That is a personal view. I believe that policy is more appropriately placed on a harm minimisation basis, to ensure that members of the community who do, for whatever reason, become victims of the use of those drugs have an opportunity to be able to receive appropriate care and treatment and restoration of their place in the community, which the present approach in many ways does not emphasise.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .