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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 11 Hansard (19 October) . . Page.. 3236 ..

MR HARGREAVES (continuing):

Well, Mr Speaker, it does not say how that is going to happen, and I have to say I have not got a lot of faith in how it has been used effectively and efficiently in the past. One of the ways in which I could demonstrate my lack of confidence in that is by referring to the mutterings and murmurings about the possibility that we might be trying to fund any safe injecting room trial through the Treasurer's Advance. I think that is a most inappropriate source of funding for that.

Ms Carnell: Where would you get it from?

MR HARGREAVES: A separate appropriation, Mr Speaker, I think is most appropriate. If the Chief Minister has the audacity to come into this chamber and suggest that the attack on the drug problem in the ACT is less important than a car race for which a separate appropriation was brought forward, then I think we all think a little better of her than for her to do that. The thinking about the safe injecting room has gone on for a long enough time now for the criteria for the trial to be developed and for the evaluation mechanisms to be developed, as well as who will do it. I am sure the Minister has a pretty clear idea about how that is going to work. I warn the Government that the provisions for the Treasurer's Advance about something being unforeseen are quite clear. We know that this is not unforeseen. I would urge the Minister to bring forward a separate appropriation because I sense a general acceptance within this chamber of the trial, although not total acceptance, and it would be sad if commitment to the trial were watered down by criticism of the method of funding it.

On that same page, Mr Speaker, the document also talks about the Government working in partnership with the private sector, the community and community organisations. I know that the Government works with community organisations, even though the level of funding is sometimes not quite enough. I do not know how the Government works with the community as such, and I certainly do not know how the Government works with the private sector. I would like to have seen some indication in this report of just how the Government intends to work with the private sector to attack the drug problem. I have no idea, Mr Speaker, how that would work, and later, when Mr Moore replies to this debate, he might let us know. I am, in a sense, quite happy to see the sort of multi-partnership that exists here. I would just like to know how it is going to work.

I think the Government ought to be congratulated on making good use of the former Watson Hostel premises to create the facility to be run by the Noffs Foundation. I note the item on page 13 which talks about the residential rehabilitation program for young folk and I applaud the approach that has been taken in this regard. A case management plan, I believe, is the only way to go about it, and what is going to happen at the former Watson Hostel premises is, I think, a magic thing. I think it is a great step forward and I congratulate the Government for that. I think everyone is a winner with that one.

On that same page, Mr Speaker, there is a very small item about methadone, and I was pleased to see that additional places will be provided through the establishment of a private stream as an adjunct to the existing system. But, yet again, there is nothing in this document that tells me how the establishment of the private stream would work. I am quite keen to see any sort of initiative that will increase people's access, under a controlled environment, to measures which will get them off the dreaded heroin, but

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