Page 3298 - Week 11 - Thursday, 12 September 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
of reducing the harm associated with it and changing community attitudes. With reference to alcohol, we have already made some headway with community attitudes in ensuring that the people who do drink do not drive. The harm associated with that has improved. Mr Duby was instrumental in reducing the alcohol level from .08 to .05, and that is part of that same battle, concentrating on the reduction of harm associated with the use of alcohol.
I am not inclined to support this move for an inquiry under the ACT Inquiries Act; I am not inclined to support the amount of money that would be involved in an inquiry. By a quick calculation, that could easily go to $400,000, even by November. I think that expenditure to that extent would have to be much more seriously considered than by means of a motion that was drawn to the attention of members of the Assembly just prior to lunch. But, for it to go to an Assembly committee would be most appropriate.
Mr Jensen: It still costs money.
MR MOORE: Mr Jensen interjects that it still costs money. That is true. But it would provide a focus of attention within money that is already there.
Mr Jensen: It would get buried like this one did.
MR MOORE: Mr Jensen interjects and waves a committee report at me. We already have a committee report and we do not need a further inquiry. You are suggesting that we tackle this.
Ms Maher: What about the cost to the community if it continues?
MR MOORE: I will take an interjection from Ms Maher, who says, "What about the cost to the community?". I could not agree more strongly with that perspective. There is a great cost to the community.
The way we can handle this problem is for the Assembly to take it on, not for us to commission a further inquiry outside the Assembly. It is a perfectly appropriate inquiry for the Assembly to take on. If it gets to the stage that we make some headway towards resolving a problem that there are no black-and-white answers for, if a committee of the Assembly brings down a next-step type of report, that will be entirely appropriate, as it would lead the way for the following Assembly to bring down a report on the step after that, and so on.
It is a problem we have to tackle and I believe that the motion has been brought on with the appropriate motives. I just think the methodology that is being adopted is not the most appropriate methodology for us to use, and I think it is a shame that we have not had more time to think about it. Perhaps the appropriate thing to do is to adjourn this debate until tomorrow so that we can have more time to discuss it.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .