Page 1412 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 6 April 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
management unit has had an impact and that the separation of inmates is important, especially for human rights and physical protection.
The Hamburger report does commend the excellent service provided through the therapeutic community. However, its location has caused some problems in that it takes up two cottages and more space than it may require. Members of the therapeutic community do get intimidated by other inmates as well and I do know that the government and the prison itself are considering moving the community to another part of the AMC.
The report has also listed concerns about the administration of policies regarding discipline and performance management, which require change. Despite these concerns, which I have just raised, the salient point which I take away from this report is that Mr Hamburger and his team believe there is a commitment from corrections staff, the government and the community to detainees’ human rights. This to the Greens is one of the most important points, for in the lead-up to the prison being constructed community organisations feared that that old style of corrections culture would not be able to be transformed into what was hoped. This has been the most important aspect of the prison that we have had to monitor and encourage, as if there is no will to deliver human rights and prisoner rehabilitation it will not be achieved.
The report says:
A strong basis has been set for a culture and a shared set of values at the AMC to deliver on commitments relating to the protection of detainees Human Rights and the delivery of best practice rehabilitation programs. The AMC is unique in relation to other Australian prisons in the high level of attention paid to detainees’ human rights.
That is to me one of the most salient points, for that is the strongest asset the government has in developing a system that provides for the rehabilitation of sentenced prisoners.
The Hamburger review into problems with urine analysis shows, I believe, that the minister was misinformed by the department but that this was not done intentionally. Rather, the changeover of staff and the introduction of a new superintendent who signed off on briefs led to a periodic diminishment of ensured information flows. The Greens are of the view that the mistake is highly regrettable, as it has led to a hole in important data that can be used to monitor the presence of drugs in the prison population. But the mistake is not evidence for damnation. It was a mistake; it was not intended, and significant harm has not been caused as a result.
Paragraphs 4 and 5 of the motion describe the independent reports provided as “damning” of the government. If that is the case, why then is it that both reports recommend that the ACT government introduce an NSP? If these independent experts think the facility and its management so poor, why do they recommend Australia’s first NSP be introduced?
I have to say that we are just into the fourth sitting week of the year and we already have seen Mr Hanson move three censure motions. Labor actually moved one,
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video