Page 2204 - Week 08 - Thursday, 10 September 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
notice very clearly that the issue placed before this Assembly by the Liberals is not a matter of public importance at all. One has to have something to measure the matter of public importance against. Otherwise, how does one debate the issue? If I am able to draw comparisons between the Alliance Government and the Labor Government, it will be edifying for all in the Assembly - - -
Mr Humphries: But not relevant.
MR BERRY: Mr Humphries says, "But not relevant". His poor performance and bad reaction to public criticism are supposedly not relevant, so we cannot use them as a measure. That is fair enough.
Mr De Domenico: He at least consulted widely, Mr Berry, unlike you.
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I think the comparisons have been made, Mr Berry; but please continue with your address.
MR BERRY: First of all, there has been no public criticism of Labor in relation to this matter. The Canberra Times, of course, has made a criticism, and that is entirely up to the Canberra Times. Some entirely inaccurate and emotive statements have been made here this afternoon. It has been claimed that there was a raid on the Canberra Times. This is something that the Liberals have hung their hat on. As the Liberals are likely to do, they have tried to mould this issue in a way that would mislead the people of the ACT; but they cannot. It was not a raid.
According to the papers, some police officers with a warrant entered the Canberra Times in accordance with the law. The Liberals complain about the pursuit of the law. What have they done to repeal the law? I say that they have done nothing. They did nothing about it when they were in office and they have done nothing about it since. So one can assume from that that they support the law. Assuming that they support the law and given their undying support for our police - they have always demonstrated support for our police - one would expect them to support the police pursuing the law and, of course, pursuing people who may have broken it.
Are the Liberals saying that the police should not investigate alleged breaches of the law? I will bet they are not saying that. Why do you not come out and say it - that the police should not investigate breaches of the law? There has been no denial in this place that the laws in place apply to officers where it has been alleged that breaches have occurred. So the Liberals have been quite phoney on this issue and have tried to beat this matter up into something that it is not. I have dealt on other occasions with their performance. They have always behaved badly when they themselves have been criticised.
This matter of public importance is nothing more than a stunt. The carping complaints of Mrs Carnell have not added to the quality of the debate at all. I will deal with some of the issues she has raised. In terms of her methadone program for her friends in the pharmacy business, she is entitled to put her view and the Government is entitled to oppose it - and the Government does, because the Government does not support an expansion in the private sector. It supports the well thought out proposal to retain the program in the public sector in order that the community and those people who need the services will receive them appropriately.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .