Page 2483 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 31 July 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
In doing so, I would note two things about the action plan. First, it is a plan that goes to 2021, and the development of any such model, if it were determined to be appropriate for the ACT, would take some time. Secondly, the action plan already includes an action to:
Design and deliver a range of interventions using a number of models to meet the diverse needs of people involved in, or at risk of being involved in, the criminal justice system. This includes exploring ways to increase diversion and treatment and support options available as part of an integrated system in the ACT, through either policy or legislative reform.
Should it be determined that such a model is appropriate for the ACT, its implementation is already covered in that broad action of the existing action plan.
I would also note that that the ACT’s drug strategy action plan is based on approaches set out in the national drug strategy for 2017-26 and, to some extent, the national ice action strategy. Neither of these national documents, which were also compiled with considerable expert and public input, supports the compulsory treatment of young people.
An expert systematic review of evidence for compulsory treatment was carried out by a team led by Canadian researchers and published in 2016. The authors concluded:
Evidence does not, on the whole, suggest improved outcomes related to compulsory treatment approaches, with some studies suggesting potential harms. Given the potential for human rights abuses within compulsory treatment settings, non-compulsory treatment modalities should be prioritized by policymakers seeking to reduce drug-related harms.
This and other expert research suggests that there is no strong evidence that compulsory treatment helps people; in fact, it may harm people.
All of this being said, I look forward to reporting back to the chamber by the end of this year on my consultations and conversations with experts in the drug and alcohol sector about the efficacy of the proposal in Mrs Kikkert’s motion, and support and treatment models for young people more broadly.
I would like to briefly reflect on some of the context provided in Mrs Kikkert’s motion, particularly as it relates to the evidence-based and expert-informed ACT drug strategy action plan.
The motion includes a number of extracted quotes which, unfortunately, in some cases exclude some critical information that would be of use to the Assembly. In particular, I want to highlight the full quote in part 1(a). The ACT drug strategy action plan states:
Illicit drug use, although having a lower overall burden than alcohol and tobacco, has a particularly adverse impact on young people.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video