Page 4907 - Week 16 - Tuesday, 26 November 1991

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


the issuing of little plastic passes to everybody who visited the building, regardless of what their business was. It was also farcical that the issuing of those passes was really no guarantee of the intentions of the person making a visit. It was pro forma. It was a very silly procedure that was in fact a waste of public money.

It is also a fact that the guarding arrangements were excessive. As far as I am aware, they were made without a thorough overview of the security risk in this building. It is my belief that an open Assembly, one where people can come and go, is to the benefit of all of us. The incidents to which Mr Collaery referred all occurred while guards were on duty. I think that speaks for itself. The fact remains that the only time I suffered unpleasantness was on the floor of this chamber from a fellow member. The guards who were present at that time were not in any way able to affect the situation. So, I do not accept Mr Collaery's arguments about guards.

Electorate offices are an issue best taken up when we have electorates of our own. It is the case at the moment, very regrettably, that all 17 of us share one electorate. That will change in time. It is desirable, from my party's point of view, that that change to a system where each of the 17 members has an electorate of his or her own. In the eventuality that we do get 17 single-member electorates, it will be appropriate at that time to look at providing electorate offices. Consistent with my remarks about security, I think that the greater access the community that we serve has to members of this Assembly, the better off we will all be and the better job we can do for that community.

Mr Collaery was also going to address the provision of motor vehicles. I am not sure what his argument would have been, but I have a sinking feeling that it would have been to give us the same sorts of vehicles that our senior public servants are entitled to. All I can say again is that that would involve further expenditure of money from which the community would gain absolutely no benefit. In all three cases - the security arrangements, the electorate offices and the motor vehicles - Mr Collaery is proposing a benefit to members of this Assembly which is not reflected in a benefit to the community. I therefore believe that his comments on this part of the Appropriation Bill should be rejected.

MR STEVENSON (4.55): I felt it important to rise with regard to security. The Chief Minister has said on a number of occasions that she feels that security is inappropriate and too expensive. I think we should all remember who introduced security arrangements to the Assembly. Indeed, it was the Labor Party, on the fifth floor. You had the fifth floor blocked off.

Ms Follett: No, that is not correct.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .