Page 4695 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 19 October 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
virus management; I agree with Mr Hanson in this area. It is not completely solvable by an NSP, but an NSP has to be considered as part of it. The issues are complex; they are difficult; there are varied opinions. But I simply will not take the easy way out, which is what Mr Hanson wants me to do, and walk away from something just because it is a bit controversial or just because it is a bit hard.
The government will not be supporting Mr Hanson’s motion. I move:
Omit all words after “That this Assembly”, substitute “supports comprehensive blood borne virus management in correctional settings to improve the overall health and wellbeing of prisoners in the ACT.”.
The amendment simply replaces all the words of Mr Hanson’s motion with a view that I think the entire Assembly can support. That is something that perhaps the Assembly can unanimously support today.
MS BRESNAN (Brindabella) (4.37): I thank Mr Hanson for bringing this topic on again for discussion today because it gives us a chance to address some of the inaccuracies Mr Hanson is putting out there with the information he has been using through the media and other forums, and address some of the key issues around blood-borne virus transmission, which Ms Gallagher has already done today.
First off I am going to start with corrections officers and the CPSU. Ms Hunter, two of my staff and I actually went out to the AMC on Monday morning and had a very constructive meeting with the CPSU and four prison officer delegates. While we had different interpretations about the overseas evidence and how it can be applied locally, we reached points of agreement and discussed steps for going forward. It was a very constructive discussion.
For example, the prison officer delegates were keen to understand the finer details of how overseas models have been implemented. The delegates felt that they had not been included as a part of the task force to examine those overseas models. I explained to the delegates that Mr Moore had in fact sought the approval of the government to take a small delegation of officers with him to Europe so they could examine those overseas models together, but this was not approved through that process of the report. Mr Moore’s request to the government was news to the corrections officers. I think they were disappointed that they had not had that opportunity, and they could actually see benefits in talking to their counterparts overseas who have already implemented needle and syringe programs on the ground in those prison settings.
I told the prison officer delegates that I had made a media statement to the effect that some kind of overseas study or facilitated communication with overseas peers was an important process that should still go ahead. I appreciate that corrections staff have concerns about what a needle and syringe program will mean to their role as law enforcers and to their safety. Giving our local officers the opportunity to talk to their overseas peers means they are not just seeing reports or looking at information second hand or having us talking to them about the issue.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video