Mr DEAN ( Windermere ) - The local government elections are going quite well and it could be Councillor Kons shortly.

Madam PRESIDENT - That has nothing to do with mental health legislation.

Mr DEAN - No, it does not. This is a very important matter and I was delighted to have been on the select committee, albeit I had a bit of an interrupted phase through the hearing of the witnesses and so on in relation to this select committee.

Ms Forrest - Called an election, wasn't it?

Mr DEAN - Because of my election and unfortunately I missed out on a lot of the interesting parts of it, but I have tried to gather that knowledge on the way through and pick it up again. I am going to talk briefly in relation to the impact on police. I do not think there is any doubt at all that one of the most challenging areas for police to work with is the mental health side of things.

It is very difficult for police to be able to recognise a person who is suffering with a sickness and who has a mental health issue when dealing with issues that arise out there in the public. In fact it did lead, in the early stages shortly after de-institutionalisation, to a situation where police were finding themselves in some trouble.

There was one case that brought the whole thing to a head, as it were, with police training. The member for Nelson would well remember the case which happened here in Hobart where police were called to a situation in Liverpool Street where a person was acting violently and the police were unable at that stage to identify the difference between a criminal act and recognising that this person did in fact have a mental health problem. The Leader would probably remember that case as well. Leading from that case a number of police were charged, from memory, as a result of it. It really changed the way that police were able to react, their training, what they needed to know et cetera. We were given quite a lot of evidence through the hearings process in relation to this. At the time I was an inspector of police here in Hobart and was asked to put together a submission for police in relation to de-institutionalisation. I identified then all of these problems that police would experience with that when it occurred.

Mr Parkinson - Are you talking about holding onto video records of interview?

Mr DEAN - No, that came in a long time after that. What it meant was that police training was simply increased vigorously in relation to the way that they treated people and their understanding of mental health issues.

When we spoke to Professor Malpas he told the committee that he was involved in ethics training of police recruits at the academy and that he was now involved in that in a large way. As a result of that he felt that police were able now to demonstrate a sense of compassion as a part of their job and that most police were now able to identify reasonably quickly and easily those suffering with a mental illness. He believes that that is responsible for the lowering of the rate of complaints against police officers. Perhaps it is.

Dr Crawshaw made comment in relation to this issue as well, and I will quote from the paper we have before us:

'… to be much clearer about what happens when someone is taken into protective custody and what happens in terms of the handover process with respect to protective custody. There will always be times when, because of the risk associated, the police or the ambulance service may well need to assist our clinicians.'

That is another problem that needs to be properly covered for in an act moving forward and in changes moving forward. Inspector Mark Mewis identified this as one of the real issues that concerns police, that when they are involved in these activities, when they do bring a person in for an assessment, they are required to remain in situ in many instances for up to four and five hours and at times longer. I had personal experiences of that myself and also police who were under my command.

Inspector Mark Mewis says this, that police expect their job to finish after they bring that person into the hospital system. He says that is when they should be able to leave the precinct and leave the person in the care of the medical experts and the other people within the hospital system. I think that is what should happen myself. I think that it needs to be taken care of. There needs to be proper and effective security employed within the hospital system to ensure that that occurs. Police do not have the numbers to take them off the street for the purposes of remaining in the hospital simply to give some protection to the staff and to keep some control over a person who is being assessed. It is not really the responsibility of the police. Many do do the right thing; on many occasions police are not even called to assist in that situation but they are there.

Inspector Mark Mewis, who is well known to many members in this Chamber, a responsible and learned police officer, made this comment:

'We would like to see the legislation reflect the fact that once we present them to the primary admission centre for assessment, the health authorities then take responsibility.'

I quote him again:

'The Northern Territory and the ACT both have legislation that quite clearly states that the primary admission centre will take responsibility for custody of the person once they are presented. At the moment that is not the case here; our people will sit there for anything up to four hours until that person is assessed.'

Well, four hours. I think Inspector Mewis was being careful there because I know of times when it has been much longer than four hours and I think many police out there would be able to identify with that. So, maybe we need to look at the Northern Territory and the ACT and what is happening around the rest of the country, to come up with a strategy that will provide the relief that police are entitled to have.

Ms Forrest - It was interesting, too, that there was a witness who talked about how his son, who had a mental health disorder, was known to the police, known to the hospital, was brought in from Huonville by the police and he actually managed to make it back to Huonville before the police did -

Mr DEAN - Yes, that is right.

Ms Forrest - when he absconded from hospital.

Mr DEAN - That is one situation and that evidence came forward. I was not a part of the committee but I did read about it through the documentation.

Ms Forrest - We are not really sure how he did it but he managed to get back before the police.

Mr DEAN - Yes, so that happens and the police are rather frustrated, I suppose.

Dr Crawshaw made this comment, Madam President, and I quote part of the comment:

'… the current legislation makes it difficult for all involved. I fully understand the frustration of the police at having to sit around for four hours.'

Dr Crawshaw and others are very clearly aware of the problems and the situations that occur so one would hope that all of our recommendations are taken on board and that we will see a lot of changes to this act during the review process.

Another comment of Inspector Mewis I want to quote, Madam President, is:

'Realistically, the police should only intervene when it really becomes a matter of public safety or safety to the individual. Beyond that we really shouldn't be involved. The general principles of human rights state that police are a last resort in intervening with people suffering mental illness, for a whole range of reasons. Our preference would be that that was the case on all occasions.'

There is a tendency to call police for all sorts of situations where a person has difficulties, where they have been treated at mental institutions, where in fact the police ought not be called and ought not be there. People get a little frightened, a little concerned and they see the police as the easiest to become involved. It is very difficult for police in those situations to start to use their authority or their service to help in those situations. It is a difficult one.

We have outlined in the document a number of areas there that we would like a review to take on board and consider.

Our chairman, the member for Murchison, raised the situation of the 12-year-old. I found that absolutely horrendous. Here we have a mother responsible for her 12-year-old daughter but she was not able to get the information that was necessary for her to properly care for her daughter who had been treated at the mental institution. Really, it is just a sad situation and I cannot accept that the privacy laws were ever set up to provide for that situation. I really cannot accept that because if a parent does not look after a child responsibly they can be committing offences against that child; neglecting their child, et cetera, et cetera, but if they do not know what is required and what is necessary it makes it very difficult for them. It was such a sad situation.

There was another matter involving an older person at the mental institution at Launceston, Ward IE. I am not quite sure of the new name, but I have referred to it in this Chamber before, where a lady was suffering post-natal depression after the birth of her child, and went into Ward 1E - I refer to it as Ward 1E at this stage - and was there for some period of time. She recovered, was given support, and several years later she and her husband made a decision to have a second child. She again suffered post-natal depression after the birth of the second child and she was in hospital for quite some time.

Her next of kin at this stage were in fact her parents and they were never notified of her release. She had told the staff that she was feeling well, that she was okay, so she could leave the hospital. Her parents were never notified of that. Of course an extremely tragic situation followed, where she arrived home and shortly thereafter, went out and hanged herself.

It was just tragic, her father, a 60-something-year-old man, crying like a baby in front of me, explaining the situation and saying that had he known about her release, they may well have been able to help their daughter, and the daughter of course left behind two very young children. There do need to be a lot of changes, but I cannot accept how the privacy laws were ever set up to interfere with processes such as these, I really cannot.

Ms Forrest - To exclude family?

Mr DEAN - Pardon?

Ms Forrest - Are you saying it was not set up to exclude family in this sort of setting? Is that what you are talking about?

Mr DEAN - Yes. To me it is a very, very sad situation, so I would certainly like to see changes there and I think so would a lot of other people. I would like to commend our Chairman, the member for Murchison, in the way she handled this matter and chaired the many meetings that we had and her contributions to them. If I could also recognise our secretary, Mrs McLeod here, the Usher of the Black Rod, for her very strong support of this committee throughout the whole process. Indeed it was extremely professional and certainly has assisted us tremendously in putting together this report, so I just thank all the other members.