Page 1308 - Week 07 - Thursday, 24 August 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
in the budget? I must have misread the budget. I did not see the page where it said that additional resources had been given to police to provide these kinds of services.
If the Government had shown its bona fides by producing some action on the very things it says are the underlying causes of these problems, I would be happy to accept that it was serious about tackling them. But it has not, and in my view, the only responsible course of action is for this Assembly to tackle the problem, at least at its symptom stage, by giving the police the power to prevent crime by moving people on in certain prescribed circumstances.
What I say should not be inferred to be support for some of the things that have come out as a result of amendments by the select committee. I am not particularly enthralled with the level of penalty in this Bill. I must say it would have to be the lowest such penalty provided for this kind of offence anywhere in Australia, and by comparison with other equivalent offences it would also have to be extremely low in terms of what other sorts of offences the police have the power to deal with at the present time. I wonder whether this would really constitute a very effective deterrent. But I am still confident we can achieve something with it, and as a result of that the Opposition will be supporting this Bill.
The claims of severity on the part of the Government are, I think, pretty hard to swallow when one considers that only a few weeks ago the Government unblushingly put forward a Bill amending the Nature Conservation Act to provide for penalties of $10,000 or five years gaol for picking wildflowers. There was not a trace of their blushing in doing that and yet the idea of fining someone $200 for failing to comply with a lawful police order sends the Government into gasps of horror. I think this Bill is entirely appropriate. The Opposition supports it and I hope the Assembly as a whole sees merit in giving the police the powers referred to here.
MR MOORE (10.48): Mr Speaker, it interests me particularly to follow Mr Humphries' speech, which seemed almost entirely irrelevant to the particular matter at hand. I think we should take this opportunity to point out to people that when the clock is going and it says we have 10 minutes we do not have to fill the 10 minutes. It is quite appropriate that, if a speech can be brief, we do not have to deal with car thefts and wildflowers and a budget, - matters that have absolutely no relevance to Canberra at all at the moment. In due time I am sure the Government will look at the police budget when it becomes part and parcel of it.
Mr Humphries: You would like to vote against this Bill, would you not?
MR MOORE: Let me draw attention to your comment on car thefts. How would a move-on power possibly apply to car
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .