Legislative Council Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2) 53 2 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Question Time Ice Taskforce Ice Taskforce The Hon. J.S. LEE Legislative Council Ice Taskforce The Hon. J.S. LEE (15:19): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Police a question in his role as the chair of the Ice Taskforce. Leave granted. The Hon. J.S. LEE Legislative Council The Hon. J.S. LEE: In the minister's recently released document, titled 'Stop the Hurt: South Australian Ice Action Plan', it is stated that the government is considering a model for mandatory assessment and/or treatment for those at extreme and immediate risk, which is based on the Victorian Severe Substance Dependence Treatment Act 2010. The Victorian act allows for a brief period (up to 14 days) of detention and compulsory treatment of people where it is necessary as a matter of urgency to save a person's life or prevent serious damage to their health. One of the biggest concerns for the community is that ice use in South Australia is increasing rapidly. My questions to the minister are: 1.	Does the minister consider the mandatory drug treatment orders for persons under 18 a necessary undertaking and the most effective measure as part of the proposed model? 2.	With the action plan stating the government is considering the model, can the minister indicate what he believes is a reasonable time frame to finalise such a consideration? 3.	Will the minister adopt the Victorian act by detaining and providing compulsory treatment of people in emergency circumstances and, if so, when will this policy be implemented? 4.	Does the minister concede that mandatory drug treatment is most fundamental in dealing with drug use? The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS Legislative Council Minister for Police, Minister for Correctional Services, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Road Safety The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS (Minister for Police, Minister for Correctional Services, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Road Safety) (15:21): I thank the honourable member for her question. She is right to refer to the Ice Taskforce document and one of the findings that came out of it in and around mandatory treatment orders. As the Hon. Ms Lee has stated, this is our effort to analyse and thoroughly work through the Victorian model and see if it is delivering the results that everyone desires, which of course is a reduction in the consumption of ice, and as part of that having those people suffering from addiction getting access to the appropriate treatment. I have to say that the idea, philosophically and logically, of having mandatory treatment apply to those people suffering from an addiction of any description, but particularly a drug addiction of the likes of ice, which we know can cause so much damage, appeals to me. It seems to make a lot of sense that, if an individual is suffering from an ice addiction and is incapable of making decisions consciously as a result of their addiction and wants to kick that habit, that person be subjected to some form of mandatory treatment in order to be able to achieve the desired outcome. As we went through the task force process—and we heard from experienced clinicians, members of the community, providers of drug and alcohol treatment services—I spent a lot of energy trying to listen to everything they said with a view of finding evidence that indicates that such an approach works, and it was difficult to come by. Overwhelmingly, people who work within this sector tend to argue that mandatory treatment is something that doesn't work. I know that sometimes defies logic, but I think it is really important, when policymakers are seeking to introduce a response to a significant issue, that they try, to the best extent possible, to ensure that that policy is informed by evidence, and that is exactly what we have done here. There are some instances around the country, in Victoria, where there are mechanisms for mandatory treatment to occur. Victoria strikes me as probably the best example of where that is operating and we want to do a thorough analysis to look at how the Victorian model is operating, and if there is evidence that suggests it is working well then South Australia can look at adopting a similar method. In terms of the time line, SA Health is working with the Attorney-General's Department to undertake that review of the Victorian model. We have not put a specific time line on it, but needless to say—and I think this has been demonstrated by the fact the task force has responded in a very timely way—we are committed to addressing this issue as quickly as we possibly can. I think it would be unwise, with an evidence-based review of this nature, to put a specific time limit on it, apart from saying that we want it to be achieved as quickly as possible. And if there is evidence that suggests that this is working and can continue to work and the resources are there to be able to ensure that it can be applied in its best format, then that is something the state government is very interested in pursuing. I think we are all collectively, in a bipartisan way, or indeed across the parliament, committed to seeing an ice reduction. If that requires legislative reform, then I think collectively in this parliament we are capable of pursuing such a reform and passing it in due course.