Page 4348 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 22 September 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
There are a number of measures that can be taken to reduce the amount of drugs in jail and, hopefully, get it down to zero. Some are used in the ACT; some are used elsewhere. They include drug sniffer dogs and ensuring that there are sophisticated screening measures for all visitors. There is our X-ray machine; I am not sure if that is being used on all visitors or staff. There is random and frequent searching of prisoner cells. Effective intelligence is an important part of this. There is the random drug testing of prisoners and targeted drug testing of prisoners. There are effective rehab programs, isolation for prisoners found to be smuggling drugs, use of restrictions of privilege for those found to be smuggling drugs, restrictions on contact visits for prisoners, a loss of remission for parole for prisoners found to be smuggling drugs, searching of visitors if necessary, and swab tests of visitors’ hands. These are all measures that can be used. Some are used by the ACT, but clearly some are not used as effectively as they should be.
It does appear that the ACT government has somewhat given up on eradicating drugs or limiting the use of drugs in the jail. But an NSP will not solve the problem. It will create more problems than it resolves. It will give prisoners easy access to the tools needed to inject their drugs. It is akin to condoning drug use.
The CPSU is adamant that its members are unanimously opposed, for a variety of reasons—principally because of their safety but also because of multiple studies from the US Institute of Medicine, a review from 2006 that shows that needle and syringe programs do not reduce the transmission of hep C. There is still debate about the effectiveness of these programs, not only to broader society but, if they are introduced in jail—whether they will actually make the difference. The US Institute of Medicine review in 2006 said that evidence regarding the effect of needle and syringe exchange on HIV incidents is limited and inconclusive.
The bottom line is that the Liberal Party will not sacrifice the safety and security of corrections staff and will not be supporting an NSP.
I would like to turn to the issue of random drug testing. It is important because it is very unclear exactly what regime is in place in the ACT. It is a very important measure that will measure the extent of drug use, detect and punish users, discourage the use of drugs, and allow us to refer people to rehab programs.
The government has a legislative framework. It has the Corrections Management Act 2007, the Corrections Management (Urinalysis) Policy 2009 and the AMC’s hierarchy of privileges. They all allow us to conduct random drug testing. But it appears that it is not actually utilising this program. The minister today has been nothing but obtuse. He was asked by me yesterday in question time and he was asked by the media, but he continually gives vague answers. He is not getting to the nub of the question: are there any comprehensive regimes of mandatory random drug testing in the jail?
We know that there is drug testing on inmates when they arrive at the jail. We know that people, as I understand it, who get onto rehab programs voluntarily submit themselves to drug testing. And there is certainly some targeted drug testing. But that is very different from a full regime of random drug testing. And if that is not
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video