Page 2661 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 28 June 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I would like to acknowledge all those people who have participated in the review and assisted in finalising the government’s final response to the review. I would also like to thank the Assembly for its interest in this matter, and reiterate that this government is committed to ensuring that safe, high quality care is available to all those detained in the Alexander Maconochie Centre.
MR HANSON (Molonglo) (3.21): I certainly think that the Assembly has had great interest in this matter, the Burnet report. It needs to be noted that it was an exceptionally damning report. I will go to just some of the findings of the report. It contained enormous detail. From recollection, there were 195 pages and 69 recommendations.
What it talked about was a lack of leadership and governance, policy guidance and policy coordination at the jail. It talked about the fact that drug services at the jail were fragmented and poorly coordinated. The drug policies were not developed with front-line staff consultation, leading to ineffective outcomes. In respect of the human rights compliant approach, there was a consideration that that is actually harming rather than aiding the effective management of the prison and drug rehab programs.
It talked about an inadequate blood-borne virus testing regime meaning that any data that was available on hep C or other diseases was unreliable. It noted that the inadequate hep C testing regime and the way it was conducted—this is to do with antibodies only—may actually be encouraging prisoners to take risks because they are getting false positives. That is the way that this testing was being done. It noted that prisoners with hep C experienced poor access to treatment, that illicit drug testing at the jail was ineffective, that strategies to prevent illicit drugs entering the jail are failing, and that searching for drugs and contraband was inconsistent and results were questionable.
It stated that case management of prisoners was totally inadequate, prisoner through care was totally inadequate, the counselling of prisoners was deficient and that the education, employment and recreational programs and facilities were inadequate and compared unfavourably with New South Wales. It noted that the drug rehab programs were limited, poorly attended and in some cases under-resourced. The mixed category of the jail—that is, with male and female remand and sentenced prisoners all together—led to some very negative outcomes, particularly for remandees and female prisoners who could not get access to a number of the programs. Prisoners experienced poor access to health care that was not in accordance with the much touted human rights compliant jail that the government talks about. Prisoners with mental illness were not receiving adequate support. Health staff appear to be pushing methadone on prisoners after they had already detoxed. It also states that there is an apparent conflict between ACT Health and corrections.
I look forward to reading the government’s response to the report because there is no doubt that the report was damning. Since the report was tabled, which the government has used despite all the evidence to the contrary to pursue their ideological obsession for a needle syringe program, we have seen the prison staff provide a petition to this Assembly making it abundantly clear that they do not support a needle and syringe program.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video