Time to help, not stop, Shalom House drug rehabilitation centre

The State Government — confronted with the latest figures of methamphetamine use in WA — will soon become embroiled in the fight over the Shalom House drug rehabilitation centre in Henley Brook.

Before that happens, it is time to call out the hypocrisy and double-dealing that continues to put the facility’s future in jeopardy. For three years now the City of Swan — and some of its councillors — have fought with all their bureaucratic might to shut down Shalom House on Park Street.

It is not because the men have caused problems for the community or the property has become a blight on the landscape. Put simply, some folk do not want it in their backyard and the council has dished up disingenuous arguments to bolster such nimbyism.

Rather than assist Shalom House, which is helping dozens of men break free from drug addiction and crime at no expense to the taxpayer, the council is applying all the red-tape resistance it can muster while feigning support.

More than once the City of Swan has given Shalom House and its founder Peter Lyndon-James notice to cease using the vast property for drug rehabilitation. Not that you would know that from reading a question and answer page on the council’s website.

“The City of Swan has taken no action to close Shalom House and believes the not-for-profit facility does an excellent job in the rehabilitation of drug and alcohol dependence,” it reads. “This is purely a planning issue.”

But in May, when the State Administrative Tribunal determined that Shalom House should be allowed to continue because it fits the definition of “community purpose” under the council’s town planning scheme, the blocking continued.

If the problem was “purely planning” then the SAT had provided the council with a way to move forward.

Four months later, SAT judge David Parry again sided with Shalom House’s call for the council to reconsider its position.

With the City of Swan’s resistance continuing, Planning Minister Rita Saffioti has been drawn into the saga.

“The Planning Minister is concerned the potential approval of this use in the Swan Valley Planning Act area may have a substantial effect on the future planning of the area, which is currently subject to a government review,” a statement last week read.

That does not sound promising for Shalom House and Mr Lyndon-James.

“There needs to be a clearer definition of ‘community purpose’ in local planning schemes and the WA Planning Commission will investigate a specific land use definition for rehabilitation facilities,” the minister’s statement read.

The hypocrisy of all the hand-wringing and defiance about Shalom House is breathtaking.

For two years running, Mr Lyndon-James has been lauded with high honours because of the work Shalom House does in accepting those drug-addled men who governments struggle to grapple with in the methamphetamine malaise.

In 2017, Mr Lyndon-James was Western Australian of the Year in the “Community” category. This year he was awarded WA’s “Local Hero” in the Australian of the Year honours.

“Peter’s 100 per cent self-funded program helps up to 140 men struggling with addictions,” the Local Hero citation read. “Wearing his hard-knock heart on his sleeve, Peter works intensively with program residents to help them face their demons, identify past failures and establish future goals. His system is working, and today he leads a team of up to 70 staff and volunteers.”

It might be working, but officialdom could still be the undoing of Shalom House.

“The city can’t ignore the rules for one property at the expense of the many businesses, families and farms that make up the Swan Valley,” the council’s website argues.

Expense? Let’s hope that Ms Saffioti also considers the expense to the community of WA’s regional methamphetamine crisis before deciding where Shalom House fits in with her Government’s planning review.

It might also be worth pondering if the work of Shalom House has contributed to the reduction of methamphetamine use in the city.

Judge Parry certainly weighed up the benefits of the facility before concluding it fell within the definition of “community purpose” and called on the council to rethink its approach to Shalom House.

“Certainly, there is individual benefit to a person who is successfully rehabilitated from drug use,” he said in his May judgment.

“There is also benefit to the person’s family which has had to suffer and in some cases has been destroyed by their family member’s drug use. Furthermore, in my view, rehabilitation of a drug addict involves significant benefit to the wider community which is subjected to the criminal and antisocial consequences of drug use.”

At the end of the day, it is bordering on madness to put obstacles in the way of someone who has stepped up to help mitigate the damage being done by drugs and crime in the community. Both the City of Swan and State Government should be going out of their way to investigate Shalom House and how to ensure it survives.

Before winning the election last year, the Labor Party promised a fresh approach to dealing with methamphetamine issues in WA.

Cutting the red tape that threatens to strangle Shalom House would be a solid way of backing that promise.