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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 9 Hansard (2 September) . . Page.. 2759 ..

MRS CARNELL (continuing):

Mr Speaker, I turn now to treatment options. The ACT Government is committed to ensuring that there is a range of treatment options available for opioid-dependent people. The Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy agreed at its 31 July 1997 meeting that the ACT should proceed with the first stage of the heroin trial, along with a trial of buprenorphine to assist heroin users to become completely drug free. Obviously, I am deeply disappointed that the Federal Cabinet has ignored the ministerial council by deciding not to make the necessary amendments to Commonwealth legislation to allow the trial to continue. The ACT Government will now work with the Victorian Government in establishing a trial of buprenorphine in withdrawal and naltrexone in relapse prevention from heroin dependence.

The ACT Government will also closely monitor the trials of naltrexone and buprenorphine in other jurisdictions, as well as the trial of slow release morphine in Victoria, to see whether it would be appropriate to further expand the range of treatment options available to people in the ACT. These trials need to proceed as part of a strategic framework which also includes health promotion campaigns, treatment rehabilitation and effective law enforcement. The trials should be seen as an adjunct to the provision of methadone, which is currently the most effective form of treatment for heroin-dependent people. In recognition of the importance of methadone, the Government has recently announced an expansion of the methadone program by 30 places, bringing to 430 the total number of places on the ACT methadone program.

Mr Speaker, rehabilitation is obviously very important. Rehabilitation programs form an important component of the total drug and alcohol services in the ACT. Indeed, more than 135 beds are available for alcohol and other drug rehabilitation and detoxification in both government and non-government services in the ACT. I note that the shadow Minister for Health and Community Care, Mr Berry, has called for an increase in funding for rehabilitation programs. In 1997-98 the allocation of funds for alcohol and drug programs in both government and non-government sectors will be $4.49m in the ACT.

It should be noted that in the ACT both government and non-government providers provide a significant role in the provision of alcohol and drug programs and services with outputs being purchased including residential rehabilitation, detoxification, case management, drug information, advocacy, counselling, court treatment referral, health promotion, a 24-hour help-line and family support services. It is a concern to government that there is currently no specific residential rehabilitation service for young people under the age of 18, and this is an issue which should be considered in the evaluation of the ACT drug strategy which will be conducted later this year.

In a recent report on Drugs, Money and Governments 1995-96, published by the Alcohol and Drugs Council of Australia - that is, the ADCA - it was reported that the ACT provided more funding on drug programs and services per capita than any other jurisdictions with the exception of the Northern Territory. The ADCA also ranked the ACT second in ensuring that treatment programs and services are available and ensuring programs are provided to prevent and to reduce problems. The ACT can be proud of its achievements and its national standing in relation to minimisation of harm caused by drugs. This does not mean, Mr Speaker, that we should be complacent.

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