POSSIBLE ROLE FOR MORE GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS

Department of Education and the Department of Employment and Training

Centrelink, Work Net, Employment Plus and other employment agencies have been tapped into for people in phase three of the Drug Court program to be provided with vocational assessments, counselling and training. However the extent of the service is very limited and no specific funding has been provided for them to provide this service.

It is encouraging (and surprising to some) to learn that one of the first things that most Drug Court participants actually look for as soon as they are becoming abstinent is work. Some participants even need to be held back from seeking employment so that they can successfully complete a significant part of the program and build the foundation needed to maintain an abstinent lifestyle. They each require the work not only for money to support families but also to improve their self-esteem.

Twenty-two of the 51 graduates as at 31 March 2003 were in employment. Some of the others were at TAFE or undertaking other courses, but the database can not provide a figure.

There is not enough being done to assist graduates and those approaching graduation to achieve better education and employment. For example, most participants are unable to meet the cost of TAFE courses they would like to attend before or after graduation. There have been people in the program who are quite physically and intellectually talented. They need better access to apprenticeships, catering and hospitality courses, computer courses and many others. There is room for more government departments to become involved in the whole-of-government approach which has made the Drug Court a success to date.

The co-ordination of employment initiatives for Drug Court Phase 3 participants could be a task for the Department of Employment and Training. The development of new initiatives such as the Group Training Mature Aged project for people aged over 45 (part of the Breaking the Unemployment Cycle) and projects like the Brisbane City Council traineeship program for drug dependent youth in recovery are to be encouraged.

Queensland Transport Driver licences

Many Drug Court referrals involve people who are charged with, or who have previous convictions for, traffic offences including driving whilst unlicensed or disqualified driving. Alternatively, the traffic laws sometimes require the mandatory disqualification of a defendant before the Drug Court.

While a person is in active addiction he or she may have little regard for traffic laws. Indeed it seems part of the drug culture to ignore driver licensing laws.

However, once a participant has taken part diligently for 12 to 18 months in an intensive drug rehabilitation program and achieved abstinence for a significant period he or she develops better reasoning skills and insight. They start to think about clearing all debts and getting a fresh start. They develop more respect for the law and start to think more about the need for a driver licence because it will assist to obtain and hold employment. Then they are confronted by their mandatory disqualification.

In some cases, where the defendant is not licensed but also not disqualified or soon able to regain a license, the pilot program magistrates will actually make it a condition of the intensive drug rehabilitation order that the person attend defensive driving courses, take driving lessons or sit for a driving test. This is done to assist their reintegration.

It would be a huge benefit if graduates, having spent a considerable period being crime free and drug free and having put a genuine effort for a considerable period in an intensive drug rehabilitation program, could regain some form of driver licence as a reward for their rehabilitative efforts.

Also, more programs like the Indigenous Road Safety Initiative are required. At present the initiative is restricted to Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders in correctional facilities in North Queensland. The aims²¹ are to—

• test Indigenous inmates for Learner Licences while in prison,

• improve road safety through increased levels of licensing of drivers, and

21 The aims were explained in a letter dated 5 August 2002 from the Executive Director (Land Transport and Safety), Queensland Transport to the Chief Magistrate, and distributed to all

Recommendation No. 57

The Department of Employment and Training should be invited to become a further stakeholder and partner in the Drug Court program and provide assistance to Phase 3 participants to achieve the aims of obtaining further education and becoming employed or employable.

• decrease the levels of incarceration for Indigenous people for unlicensed driving.

The Drug Court has similar aims for all participants, especially having regard to the level of known drug-driving, discussed in the next section of this report.

Driving and defensive driving courses

An obvious parallel issue is the need to get participants qualified to drive, to enhance their driving skills and to improve their respect for road rules.

A considerable number of Drug Court participants come to the court charged with driving offences. As at 31 March 2003, of the 12,276 offences referred to the Drug Court, 737 (6%) were traffic offences equating to 6%.

Of these, 120 (just under 1% of the total) were dangerous driving offences. Many were associated with amphetamine use. Amphetamine use poses a significant public health problem in Australia generally and in Queensland particularly²². Markedly abnormal mental states occur following the use of amphetamines and amphetamines can also induce an acute or chronic psychotic state. The drug helps the user to feel invincible, one even commenting it seemed like time had slowed down and that he felt he could evade the police. Some are suffering a drug induced psychosis while they drive, perhaps believing everyone or the police are out to get them.

22 Dr Russ Scott and Dr William Kingswell, Amphetamines, Psychosis and the Insanity Defence: Disturbing Trends in Queensland, 23 Qld Lawyer 5, p151 (2003).

Recommendation No. 58

Consideration should be given by the Drug Court Reference Group to inviting Queensland Transport to contribute to the whole-of-government Drug Court program by amending the driver licensing laws to enable the Drug Court to reward true graduates with the right to apply for a driver licence. It could be a provisional licence or have other restrictions. For example, it could be limited to Drug Court graduates who have achieved a minimum period of being abstinent and crime free, say 9 months.

Recommendation No. 59

More programs like the Indigenous Road Safety initiative are required to increase levels of licensing of drivers and decrease the levels of incarceration through repeat offending by unlicensed driving. People with a history of unlicensed or disqualified driving should be specifically targeted. The Drug Court would be a good starting place.

There is nothing new in this. Recent studies by the Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety—Queensland (CARRSQ)²³ suggest that drug driving is on the increase. It is even suggested that drug driving may be more common than drunk driving.

The Queensland Parliamentary Travelsafe Committee report on drug driving in 1999²⁴ concluded drug driving may contribute to 6.5 % of Queensland road fatalities. It also noted a further 9% of fatally injured drivers have alcohol and drug combinations in their bodies. In 1996, ‘alcohol/drugs’ were detected in 9% of drivers involved in all reported crashes in Queensland. In its report, the committee makes 16 recommendations for the government to implement.

These issues are being examined by a Queensland Drug Driving Prevention working group, chaired by Queensland Transport.

The Drug Court is playing its part to reduce the likelihood of recidivist behaviour.

In some cases, to break the driving culture evident among drug users, the pilot program magistrate has actually ordered participants to take driving and defensive driving courses or to take other steps to prepare themselves to obtain a licence. This is not always possible due to the defendant being previously disqualified or now facing mandatory disqualification.

Greater flexibility is required where a person actually puts in the hard yards to seek rehabilitation.

However, Queensland Transport no longer conducts defensive driving courses.

Private organisations charge fees which are not likely to be affordable to the majority of Drug Court participants. Courses as short as one day may cost over

$160. Some have age restrictions. Sometimes they are free if, for example, a parent is insured with a certain insurance company.

23 Reported by the Royal Automobile Club of Queensland (RACQ) in The Road Ahead, April/May 2003, p7.

24 Travelsafe Committee of the 49th Parliament, Drug Driving In Queensland, tabled

Recommendation No. 60

Queensland Transport and the Queensland Drug Driving Prevention Working Group should be invited by the Drug Court Reference Group to examine the availability of driving courses to Drug Court participants and to advise the court accordingly. The Drug Court program should be funded to send carefully screened participants to such programs.