Page 1821 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 1 May 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
He refused to lay on the table any amendments which would, in his words, improve the legislation to his liking. He did not have the courage to do that, because what has happened here is that the Labor Opposition has stolen the march on a government that is not able to put together a decent legislative package. That is what has happened. He is embarrassed. For the Labor Party to get away with this piece of legislation would be a supreme embarrassment to him; so what he is going to do is stand in the way of it, in the same way as he has in relation to other progressive legislation that has come before this place from the Labor Party. That is what this is all about - nothing more, nothing less.
He rambled on about contravention of the Privacy Act. That is very interesting, because the Crimes Act contains the same or similar provisions, and he is the Minister responsible for that. And what is he doing about it? Absolutely nothing - because there is nothing wrong with it. There cannot be anything wrong with it if you support it. You then talked about clause 9 of the Bill in relation to restraint and the need to be careful. Tell us why you need to be careful. It is very clear in the Bill what can happen there. What amendments do you think would be necessary, Mr Attorney-General? You have not even worked them out, by the sound of it; you cannot be bothered. You would rather knock off a piece of progressive legislation because you cannot take the credit for it. You have a dog in the manger attitude; that is what it is all about.
This Attorney-General also moaned about the police "choice of care". I do not know what he was moaning about. It is very hard to work out what Mr Collaery is doing from one day to the next. But again, why not some amendments? There is not a sign of them. I say, Mr Speaker, that Mr Collaery is behaving like a spoiled brat in this chamber, and he will be exposed as a - - -
Mr Collaery: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: That is a personal reflection. I do not know what he means by "spoiled brat", but - - -
MR SPEAKER: All right. Order! I do not believe that that is unparliamentary, but you can certainly make an explanation if you feel that you have been aggrieved.
MR BERRY: Even with his legal background, I am afraid that he would have great difficulty in making out a case to prove that he was not behaving like a spoiled brat. Mr Speaker, he has not got his way, and now he is chucking a tantrum. That is the point that I am making, and I think it is clearly the case.
This piece of legislation was intended to look after people who were on hard times. It was intended to relieve the police of responsibilities which take them away from duties which perhaps would be in the better interests of the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .