Page 385 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 21 February 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
question of the numbers that will actually come over. Obviously, we want a police force that does its job well and has high morale. We want to see that the AFP facilities, which are very good, continue to be used. I would certainly hope that, whatever happens after 1 July, the police force that is contracted out to the ACT is given full support by this Assembly, and that this Assembly ensures that the police have all the powers they reasonably need to do their job properly.
We are very lucky at present in the ACT to have probably the finest police force in the country. It is well educated and its activities are scrutinised within the force, by its Internal Affairs Division, and by the Ombudsman. As the Leader of the Opposition has stated, several committees have looked closely at police conduct, and, of course, the Winchester inquiry has opened up a large number of issues ranging over many years.
The AFP is probably one of the most highly scrutinised police forces in the country. It has been put under the microscope, and it is recognised as the best police force in the country. That says a lot for the men and women of the ACT-based Australian Federal Police. I think this Assembly should note that fact. Indeed, I am pleased that various speakers, on both sides of the political fence in this Assembly, have actually expressed similar sentiments in the past. We want to ensure that that continues in any police force that we take over. Given the calibre of people in it at present, I am sure that will be the case.
MR WHALAN (11.27): I just wish to place on the record the correction of certain false statements which have been made by members on the other side. They have been made by what might be described as the "move-on powers junta" of Collaery and Stefaniak. The move-on powers junta of Collaery and Stefaniak has suggested that there has been no attempt whatsoever on our part to discuss the question of policing powers in the ACT, come 1 July 1990. That is patently false. After discussions within the Government, Ms Follett authorised me to have discussions with both Mr Kaine, who was then Leader of the Opposition and Leader of the Liberal Party, and Mr Collaery, as Leader of the Residents Rally. Those discussions did take place, and certain proposals were under way at the time of the change of government.
The record must be clear that an integral part of those discussions with Mr Kaine and Mr Collaery was the desire on the part of the then Government to ensure that whatever arrangements were finalised between the ACT and Commonwealth governments in relation to policing in the ACT, those arrangements were based on a bipartisan approach to this matter.
MR HUMPHRIES (Minister for Health, Education and the Arts) (11.29): I wish to make a brief contribution to this debate. First of all, I find the motion itself a little
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .