Page 3308 - Week 11 - Thursday, 12 September 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
for an independent committee - I stress "independent" - not an internal committee that has not got time; not a government inquiry, which would be too conscious of the revenue implications; not a liquor industry inquiry; but an independent inquiry. I realise that there are problems with the date and time, and I think Mr Humphries' foreshadowed amendment is very helpful.
I understand Mr Connolly's point. He wants to put his proposal up as some kind of challenge. I do not accept that. You do not know how hard we are working already on that committee; you do not realise how few days are left for us to do it. An independent inquiry - and I remind you of the Hudson inquiry, which we all appreciated, once it had been appointed - is the nature of the inquiry we have in mind.
In the politicking that went on, which I thought was most unfortunate, I wish to acknowledge some things: I think the pub card idea is excellent; I think the kind of educational material Mr Berry has with him is excellent; but I do not think we should dismiss the GALA report as facile, purely for political reasons. It is most unfortunate that the Labor Party does not take seriously a report from a public body, especially as it is its final report.
I also make the point that the reason for an inquiry is not to say that our notion is this, this, this and this. We are not saying that GALA's recommendations should be carried out. We are saying that GALA has raised these matters and they should be looked at. For example - and I said this earlier - one thought from the GALA inquiry is the raising of the legal age for drinking. That was seized on as though we had recommended the raising of the legal age for drinking. No-one said that. That was a complete misunderstanding of what was said.
GALA has raised a number of issues. The way to look at issues is to get an independent person or persons, or whatever it happens to be, to examine them, to inquire into them. Hudson acted independently, although he had some public service backup. That is the kind of inquiry we have in mind. We are not grandstanding about it. I think it is such an important issue that it deserves the support of everyone in the Assembly.
MR COLLAERY (5.41): I cannot add much to Dr Kinloch's remarks. They were heartfelt and well said. I simply want to make a few clarifications. I think Dr Kinloch did all the refutations. I see Mr Connolly still mouthing off and saying that it is a stunt. I do not think anyone in the Rally thought it was a stunt. I understood that the idea for an inquiry came from Ms Maher. I cannot remember where it started today, but certainly two weeks ago I issued a press release from the youth centre calling for an inquiry.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .