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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 8 Hansard (28 August) . . Page.. 2640 ..

MR BERRY (continuing):

The real problem, I think, is that there has not been a proportionally similar effort to deal with the problems that it has created. We know, at least on anecdotal evidence, that there has been an increase in injecting drug use out there in the community; but there is no sign that there has been an increased effort from the Government to deal with the drug problem in the community.

Mrs Carnell: Heaps more money, and heaps more places in the methadone program.

MR BERRY: Mrs Carnell says that there is heaps more money.

Mrs Carnell: We have gone from 150 to 430 positions.

MR BERRY: It does not seem to be working. There must, therefore, need to be a revision of the way it is targeted. I put a motion on notice calling for increased places in residential rehabilitation programs - - -

Mrs Carnell: Do they work? Or does it not matter?

MR BERRY: Mrs Carnell interjects, "Do they work?". Not for everybody.

Mrs Carnell: For about 10 per cent of people.

MR BERRY: Mrs Carnell says, "Only for 10 per cent". Should we discard the opportunity to get 10 per cent of the people who use the programs off drugs? Should we discard them?

Mrs Carnell: Do you think that is cost effective?

MR BERRY: It works for some. You can go through the whole range of arguments in relation to drug use. Some people say that prohibition does not work. I happen to say that prohibition works for most people, but it does not work for everybody. Governments have a responsibility to provide safety nets for people for whom it does not work. It is as simple as that. For example, the heroin trial might work for some people, but will not work for others. Rehabilitation programs work for some people, but they do not work for others.

Mr Speaker, the issue of drug use in the ACT is a complex one; but this Government, in my view, has fallen down on the job over the past three years. There has been a special need for a changed approach in the ACT, and it has not been taken up. There is some lost ground that needs to be dealt with in the ACT. For my part, I am prepared to support the Government in a bipartisan way if it is prepared to address the problem. But, if the Government is intent on digging its heels in and behaving doggedly on this issue, then I will continue to criticise it, because I do not think that that is the answer.

Sometimes governments have to accept that they have taken their eye off the ball for a little while and that some problems need to be sorted out. I am happy to support the Chief Minister. I do not expect her to go out into the community wearing sackcloth and ashes over the issue; but what I expect of her is some sort of a reaction.

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