Page 253 - Week 01 - Thursday, 18 February 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Madam Speaker, we have to decide why it is. We know that Gary Humphries, as chair of that committee, has had two meetings so far. That is my understanding. The first one was to elect the chair of the committee and the second one was to determine that the terms of reference that this Assembly had given them were inadequate. He brought that recommendation back to the Assembly and we accepted that. They are the two meetings he has had. For this, as chair of the committee, if my memory serves me aright, Gary Humphries picks up some $2,000-odd. Indeed, each chair of a committee picks up that remuneration. In Mr Humphries's case that works out at about $1,000 a meeting, which is not bad remuneration for somebody who can then come into this Assembly and say what a terrible - - -
Mr Connolly: Better than a queen's counsel rate.
MR MOORE: Better than a queen's counsel rate. That is a good interjection. He can then come into this Assembly and say, "Look, we have terrible problems with the police force and somebody should do something about it. We should do something about it. Somebody has to be able to do something about it. The Minister could do something about it". It is true that the Minister could do something about it and he probably will. But Mr Humphries says that the Liberals are really worried. I would not suggest for one minute that they should stop worrying. While harassing the Minister to try to solve the problems they are talking about they have it within their power to do something proactive. But the Liberals do not know how to do anything proactive, particularly Gary Humphries. All he has to do is call his committee together - he and Mr Lamont - and start an inquiry. That is not a difficult task, I would think. It is not a difficult task to organise the diaries and fit that in.
Having called the committee together and with the committee secretary there, he could then propose to his committee that it carry out an inquiry into police funding. You could have a series of public inquiries. You could even call Mr Stefaniak in and give him a little bit more media coverage. It may have some political advantage. Bring Mr Stefaniak in. Let him explain. Bring in the Australian Federal Police Association. Let them put on the table what their problems are. Give them a full - - -
Mr Humphries: And delay debate in this chamber for three months while the inquiry is going on.
MR MOORE: You do not have to delay the debate in the chamber. Your colleagues can continue the debate. If you wish to continue the debate you can, as chair of your committee and with your committee's agreement, hold public hearing after public hearing in committee room No. 1. If you are really worried about whether or not it stays on the agenda you can ask the Minister to come along and explain his position, and not just ask questions in question time. Minister, would you come along if you were asked by a committee?
Mr Connolly: Absolutely.
MR MOORE: Indeed. Under those circumstances you could ask him question after question. Mr Humphries has this totally within his power. The irony is that he does not want to take that on because he is afraid that he might find out that the police in the ACT are overfunded. He might not. He might find out something else. He is afraid that he might find that out. He is afraid that the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .