Page 2772 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 14 August 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I put the police on notice about the long delays in dealing with IID inquiries. The manner in which the Ombudsman is having resource problems and attributes that to much of the working time taken is also an issue that the respective parties are on notice about. The police IID inquiry system worries me. Although the original arrangement was to enable minor complaints to be dealt with quickly, that on my observation is not the case. Likewise, police who may have a frivolous or malicious allegation made against them are being long delayed in a resolution of the complaint, with consequent effects, no doubt, on their careers and other prospects. So, it cuts both ways.
I would enjoin the Australian Federal Police Association - the police union, as Mr Connolly referred to them on the radio the other day - to take an interest in the debate this morning in relation to the need to expedite, tidy up and give better political accountability in terms of reporting. When this sunset clause comes up next I will look to see whether there have been those concrete changes made to allow the Territory Government to have better access to matters that are the subject of complaints under the Complaints (Australian Federal Police) Act 1981.
The Rally's view is not overwhelmingly ecstatic about this power, but we accept that it has worked effectively in South Australia. It is working, to my knowledge, in the Northern Territory. I believe that a far more responsible and sensitive approach is being taken to Aboriginal issues in those two jurisdictions as a result of that power than was the case before, when there were many charges of vagrancy, drunkenness, offensive behaviour and the rest. I commend to Mr Connolly discussion of the matter with judicial and civil liberties people in his own home State, South Australia.
I again, and finally, sound a warning that, if the reportage aspects are not improved and if there is any general misuse of this power, if the power is used at any stage to deal with legitimate assembly, particularly on issues affecting civil rights, properly conducted industrial meetings and the rest, we can move swiftly to bring a Bill into this house and toss it out.
MR STEVENSON (11.51): I did not take the opportunity to speak on this matter in the in-principle stage because of the time concern. If this matter is not passed soon it will not be within the timeframe allowed. However, there are a couple of points that I will now mention. The will of the people is paramount in this matter. I think we can get a very good understanding of what that will is. In August 1989 the Canberra Times conducted a poll and it showed that 70 per cent of the representatives of the people of Canberra agreed with the move-on powers being introduced. I think it is significant that 58 per cent of the people in that poll were aged between 18 and 24. In other words, the young people, at whom we basically agree this Bill is directed, agreed with the move-on power. That is certainly significant.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .