Page 1900 - Week 07 - Thursday, 20 August 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Moore: On an MPI.
MR CORNWELL: One of the problems with MPIs is that we do not seem to have a very good track record of getting them up. I would like to refute several comments that have been made by various members, distorting my position and that of the Liberal Party. First of all, Mr Moore quoted my "regular attempts to undermine women's and children's refuges". That is an outrageous statement. I reject it publicly, and if Mr Moore reflects he might like to stand up later and apologise for making it. There is no attempt on my part, or indeed upon the Liberals' part, Mr Moore, to discredit refuges.
Mr Connolly: "The Fraser Hilton", you keep saying.
MR CORNWELL: "The Fraser Hilton" is your term, sir.
Mr Connolly: No, you used it. You said those two words in this house.
MR CORNWELL: I will await your presenting that evidence for me. Certainly, there was never any attempt on our part to discredit refuges. The cost of them and the facilities that may be incorporated in them, such as swimming pools, certainly would raise questions about their use and about the money that may have been expended; but the concept of refuges is not discredited by the Liberal Party. We agree that they are necessary, unfortunately, and that is about the only thing on which I can agree with Mr Moore.
It was suggested that we did not respond to community concerns but had started this thing ourselves. Again, Mr Moore, I reject that. We responded to community concerns, which were quite properly raised with elected representatives. In my opinion, Ms Szuty confuses privacy and secrecy. Of course people are entitled to privacy in their own homes, whether they are renting them or own them; but the secrecy surrounding these refuges - and this is the point we are making - does not help the people living in them. I and my colleagues maintain that it does not give them the protection they could have if they had surrounding them neighbours who were supportive and aware of their circumstances. Indeed, the Hansard Mr Humphries quoted from made that very point. The Neighbourhood Watch unit in that area has been negated by the actions of the Housing Trust in dealing with this matter.
We regard as important the need to consult with the community over these issues, so that we get the community's cooperation. It may be a problem, Ms Ellis, as you said; it was a terrible worry when you discussed some things with the community, and - guess what? - the community did not click their heels and agree with what you wanted. I am sorry; but the majority have some rights as well, and that is to have their views put forward and their views heard. You may not agree with them - - -
Ms Ellis: No, I do not.
MR CORNWELL: No, of course. There you are. I acknowledge the interjection. Ms Ellis does not agree with the rights of the majority or the views of the majority. That is your option. The fact is that the majority do have rights, just as much as the minority, although listening to the ten on the government side of the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .