Page 4244 - Week 14 - Thursday, 24 October 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I agree with him that members of this Assembly do take those committee responsibilities very seriously and I think it is appropriate that nothing be able to prohibit a person from communicating any information as far as the National Crime Authority goes to members of the Assembly through their select committee or standing committee. Members, I urge you to take on this responsibility. As elected members it is appropriate that you do wear this responsibility and take it seriously, as, indeed, all of us do - almost all, anyway.
MR CONNOLLY (Attorney-General, Minister for Housing and Community Services and Minister for Urban Services) (11.48): Perhaps I should give a government response at this stage. Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker, the principle of what Mr Collaery has argued for is one that the Government would agree to. The principle is fundamental - that is, that there must be accountability. At the end of the day the Assembly represents the people of the Territory and any body or organisation that is acting in the Territory and that is exercising a power under a Territory law must be accountable to the Assembly. We agree with that principle. Mr Moore reiterated it.
But it must be said that in the whole area of the National Crime Authority, which is a sensitive area, there is nothing more sensitive than the issue of the extent to which the activities of the National Crime Authority are reportable to parliamentary committees. This occurred because, unfortunately, last year - this has been well publicised; this is not divulging any confidences - material that had been made available to the parliamentary joint committee, in relation to an inquiry in South Australia of some real political sensitivity, found its way into the media.
I am not saying that it found its way into the public domain necessarily through the parliamentary joint committee, but it was material that had been given to the parliamentary joint committee and it did find its way into the public domain. That has resulted in considerable tensions between not the Federal Government and the parliamentary committee, not just the National Crime Authority and the parliamentary committee, but the intergovernmental council which is the body which, in effect, oversights the whole of the NCA.
It is important to stress that the National Crime Authority is a national body. It is not answerable only to the Commonwealth Minister; it is answerable to a committee of Ministers, chaired obviously by the Commonwealth Minister but comprising the State and Territory Ministers with responsibility in this area. The ACT, for some time now, has been represented on that in anticipation of our entering the scheme. Mr Collaery, I think, attended the first meeting, at which the ACT had been invited to sit as an observer. I attended the second one, which was held here in Canberra some months ago, and one is being held today, as we speak, in Melbourne.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .