Page 2758 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 14 August 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I think it most unsatisfactory that as Minister for all that time I had a secrecy provision quoted to me when I wanted to know some facts of the matter. I accept the sub judice rule; but the fact is that I used to go to the courts and get my own information when the police did not give it to me. I must state that I was dissatisfied. If the Federal Minister has adopted the view that he does not want to know, and he is satisfied with that supine position, so be it for Senator Tate; but not me. I wanted to know what really happened in Manuka and I wanted to know what really happened to Bernard Whalan, and I could not find out. I had the complaints Act quoted back to me.
I think that, lawfully, on a reading of this provision this morning, I could have communicated with Senator Tate and taken the issue further. But I was just starting that issue. Mr Connolly may turn up the correspondence I sent to the Assistant Commissioner some short time before I ceased holding responsibility. Mr Speaker, you do not ban X-rated videos necessarily because there are some shonky operators. You do not ban second-hand car dealers because there are shonky operators. Why should you ban a piece of legislation because there may be some misuse of the power by the police?
Putting it at its highest again, as I have said, and assuming in Mr Connolly's case that there is an arbitrary power and that it can be used arbitrarily, my strong view is that, were we to remove this power from the police, we would see the forces arrayed again against young people for behaving in an offensive manner, using insulting language, indecent words and the rest. I would be very apprehensive of the outcome of our removing this legislation now.
I propose to move an amendment to Mr Stefaniak's Bill which will give them another sunset clause while hopefully Mr Connolly gets on top of the police complaints issue and the police discipline issue and resolves matters that prevent us from quickly knowing the facts of the matter. I had similar problems over the SWAT shooting at Charnwood. I had a personal knowledge of weaponry that suggested that the first brief I got could not be correct.
Mr Speaker, I have great respect for the Australian Federal Police; they perform a great role. We have all recently said that in this house, including Mr Connolly. That respect is undiminished by the fact that in Bernard Whalan's case, I understand, one of the detaining constables had either gone to school with him or knew him from his youth. That information that I received worried me at the time. It continues to worry me.
I think that those individual issues relating to the phasing in of the move-on power, and certainly Magistrate Dingwall's decision, set a guideline for the police. Of course, all new laws require an evolutionary path. The police learn by experience, and in this case grim
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .