128. In March 2015 the IPCA released a review of Police custodial management94 that identified systemic and organizational deficits that contributed to recurring problems in Police detention. Specifically, the IPCA noted that discussions with Police and Area Mental Health Services staff have clearly shown that the problems with the way Police respond to vulnerable and mentally impaired persons are commonplace. 129. The report highlighted the absence of appropriate alternatives to Police detention for dealing with vulnerable people, including those who have not committed an offence, and the lack of a timely response by Mental Health Services to mentally impaired persons in Police custody. The IPCA considers that, unless they are violent or pose an obvious and immediate threat to the safety of others, all practicable steps should be taken to avoid having mentally impaired people detained in Police cells solely for the purpose of receiving a mental health assessment.95 130. Police have developed new training packages for both recruit and frontline officers based on feedback from Mental Health Service User (“MHSU”) groups, and acknowledged the importance of having MHSU involved in future thinking around mental health crisis response. Police watch houses with on-site mental health nurses have also resulted in better monitoring and continuity of care during police custody. The SPT recommended this practice be applied nationally. 131. The Committee may wish to consider including the following question in its LOIPR for New Zealand:  What steps is the government taking to develop a national strategy and agree a set of actions to ensure the provision of mental health care in places of detention which includes mechanisms to ensure the timely and appropriate sharing of individuals’ health information across Government agencies?  What actions – whether in YCAP or otherwise – has the government adopted to collect evidence, track and design interventions for individuals in youth justice custody who have neurodisability issues? B. Legislative recognition of economic, social and cultural rights 132. Despite New Zealand’s commitment to its international obligations, some significant gaps continue to exist in how New Zealand has incorporated these rights into domestic law. New Zealand’s policy of not ratifying a treaty until the necessary laws are already in place, together with a longstanding commitment to social welfare rights, has meant that its domestic law has generally provided an adequate framework for enforcing the international standards without further change being necessary. 133. However, in practice this can mean that not all of the rights contained in the various international treaties to which New Zealand is a party are given explicit domestic legal 94 95 IPCA, Review of Police Custodial Management, Wellington (March 2015). Ibid. 33