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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 08 Hansard (Thursday, 5 August 2004) . . Page.. 3582 ..

chance to operate as, prior to its implementation, we did not have a sobering-up facility in the ACT. The government announced that a facility would be built at Ainslie, which I think is a positive move. It is a better idea to have such a facility than to allow intoxicated people to sober up in the watch-house, which is what they do now. The government has a duty of care not only to staff but also to clients who are admitted to a sobering-up facility. That duty of care will be enshrined in this bill.

Recently, the Acting Minister for Health wrote to me and detailed the case of a client who died at the previous sobering-up facility. Only last week there was news of the death of a person in a sobering-up facility in Alice Springs, although the coroner has since determined, quite quickly in the Alice Springs case, that it was not a death in care or custody. Clearly, safety issues are involved. We must ensure that carers at the new facility and at any future facilities have the power to prevent clients from bringing in dangerous goods or substances that they might use to harm themselves or others. In order to maintain the safety of staff and clients, this bill will give carers at a sobering-up facility the ability to conduct a frisk search of clients before they are admitted.

The bill contains modern and practical definitions for dealing with transgender and intersex persons. I thank the government for including those definitions in this piece of legislation. As a society, we gradually come to terms with the fact that there are better ways of upgrading our criminal justice system. As I said earlier, detaining people in the watch-house just because they are intoxicated is not a good way to deal with any problems that might arise. The introduction of sobering-up facilities is a good step forward. As we move to establishing those facilities in the territory, this bill will ensure that they operate in the safest way possible.

MRS CROSS (8.44): The Intoxicated Persons (Care and Protection) Amendment Bill 2004 will increase the search and seizure powers of carers at a licensed sobering-up facility. That is commendable, given that in 1996 the previous sobering-up facility in the ACT was closed following the death of a client. Having a sobering-up facility in the ACT will provide many benefits to Canberrans. That facility not only would care for intoxicated persons but also would reduce public disruption whilst reducing law enforcement and health care costs as there would be a reduction in violence by and against intoxicated persons.

Sobering-up facilities are also good starting points, enabling people who have trouble with alcohol to get help. Sobering-up facilities can provide a large amount of information on alcohol and drug treatment, among other things. People at those facilities also have the ability to identify problems and then to refer clients to relevant agencies. We have evidence that suggests that sobering-up facilities contribute significantly to the public benefit. In addition, the 1998 report by the ACT Ombudsman on the use of police powers under the Intoxicated Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1994 recommended that the ACT government should ensure the provision of a sobering-up shelter.

There is a need for a sobering-up facility in Canberra. I am glad to see that the government is funding such a project. I note that carers at sobering-up shelters face many dangers. Carers are often on the receiving end of verbal attacks and at times they can be the victims of physical violence or threats of physical violence. Similarly, other clients are often placed in dangerous circumstances. This legislation will attempt to reduce those

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