Page 1317 - Week 07 - Thursday, 24 August 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
watching to make sure that they do not set a foot out of place. I submit, Mr Speaker, that that is ludicrous. It is not what we are here for, and it represents a view about the police force that is totally unjustified. It is not the place of this Assembly to set itself up as a force for surveillance over what the police force is doing.
When Mr Collaery was speaking, he raised this strange vision of Mr Collaery in the Drug Referral Centre, overlooking Garema Place, watching to make sure that the police do not do anything wrong. How stupid can you get? And I use the word advisedly, Mr Speaker. It is quite out of place and it is unnecessary. We should have avoided all of this unproductive debate weeks ago and put this Bill into place then. I hope, Mr Speaker, that the debate is concluded, I hope that we get on with it, and I hope the police are allowed to do the job which they are there for - to enforce the law and protect this community.
MR BERRY (Minister for Community Services and Health) (11.20): Mr Speaker, I rise to speak briefly too. Like the Leader of the Opposition, I will not use the 10 minutes just because it is there, but I will take up the time that is required to deal with a couple of issues that have been placed before the Assembly today which I think require response.
Mr Collaery talked about the Government's support for the Bill in his presentation to the Assembly, and I will just repeat what the Chief Minister said. The Government remains of the view that the legislation is unnecessary for two major reasons. First, a police presence is still required to give effect to the move-on power. It is our view that such visible police presence would in itself have the effect of deterring undesirable public behaviour, and the proposed legislation will have very little to do with this.
But I would also add that, contrary to what Mr Kaine has said, this is indicative that the Government supports the police in the performance of their duties. Secondly, the circumstances in which the power to issue a direction can be exercised are the same as those constituting a breach of the peace under common law. The police already have powers to deal with breaches of the peace, including move-on and arrest powers. The Bill does not add to these powers. All it does is to make a person ignoring a direction liable to a specific penalty. I think that clarifies the position in relation to the comments of Mr Collaery.
In relation to the development of the Bill, I must say that those people who gathered outside this Assembly and who participated in the committee process are to be congratulated, because I think what they have achieved, in the pressure that they exerted on the members of this Assembly, was the watering down of what was in the first place most draconian legislation. I think that the committee is to be congratulated for accepting the views of
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .