Page 1582 - Week 05 - Thursday, 2 June 2022
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MRS KIKKERT: Minister, will the Dhulwa inquiry examine safety measures which security guards have called for, including body-worn cameras, handcuffs and cameras in seclusion rooms?
MS DAVIDSON: Thank you. The nature of appointing an independent chair means that they will address whatever issues they feel are relevant within the terms of reference, and the terms of reference do address the human rights of people receiving care as well as the safety of people who are working in Dhulwa, and that would include all of the staff there. I will leave it to the independent chair to determine who they need to speak to and what issues in detail need to be addressed. But there will be opportunities for submissions and for hearings, and I would hope that anyone who feels that they have relevant information to contribute will be able to make a submission.
MR CAIN: I have a supplementary question. Minister, will you commit to implementing all of the recommendations in the preliminary and final reports?
MS DAVIDSON: I am expecting to receive the preliminary report around 12 weeks after the inquiry has started, and I am very much looking forward to receiving that report and being able to then engage in conversation with the ANMF and with CHS about how we can go about implementing the recommendations that will be made. But now knowing what the recommendations are yet, I will have to wait until I have received the report.
Light rail—stage 2
MS CLAY: My question is to the Minister for Transport and City Services. Minister, recently an FOI request led to the release of the Mecone consultancy report, an urban infill capacity assessment. The report was released under FOI where it was determined that disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to promote open discussion of public affairs and enhance the government’s accountability as well as contribute to positive and informed debate on important issues or matters of public interest. Why was the report not pro-actively released?
MR STEEL: I thank the member for her question. This document was not prepared by my directorate, either Major Projects Canberra or Transport Canberra and City Services. It was prepared for the Environment, Planning and Sustainable Development Directorate. So I will not specifically talk to that document and the decision-making, which is not in my power under the FOI Act anyway.
What I would say in relation to the light rail project is that we have shown an unparalleled level of transparency in releasing the business case for both stage 1 and stage 2A to the community. No other government does that for light rail projects and other major infrastructure projects. It is reasonable to allow the government a period of time in order to consider documents, particularly those that relate to cabinet decision-making, and to be able to make policy decisions based on those documents.
We will be engaging extensively on the light rail stage 2A project and, following that, through to stage B, because this is the most complex project from a planning
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video