Page 3085 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 15 September 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Humphries went on:
We can see the twist marks on your arm where you had it forced up behind your back.
Those members who are in parties know exactly how party discipline works. At that stage I was involved in a party, and the party discipline was such that I had argued - - -
Mr Berry: We would not want to know.
MR MOORE: I know that you do not understand this, Mr Berry, because you are always the one doing the twisting. This was one of the odd times I buckled under that discipline. I had gone into the party room arguing very strongly against this, had been outvoted and had then accepted the party position. Some members here understand that. That was the position I was in. I am not now in that position. Nevertheless, I think it is very important to draw attention to my comments at that time. I said that the whole issue needed to be dealt with by the Social Policy Committee. I said that it was not so much a question of dealing with police powers as a question of dealing with public control and how it ought to be done.
I have since consistently supported the police move-on powers. The major change since that time is that I have introduced into this Assembly a Bill which has been under the scrutiny of the Legal Affairs Committee. That Bill is designed to provide the police with the opportunity to have more presence at any scene where difficult circumstances are going to arise. The difference between that Bill and the police move-on powers is that my Bill deals with offences and on-the-spot fines. That is part of a study being undertaken by the Community Law Reform Committee. We need to assess the whole subject, and therefore we should wait for the committee to report. The argument that Ms Szuty put was that while we are waiting for the Community Law Reform Committee to report we should accept the status quo. I support her argument that the status quo is that there are no move-on powers. Had this Bill been brought on in the previous period of sittings, the status quo would have been different. The status quo is that there are no move-on powers. Until we get the report of the Community Law Reform Committee to consider, the appropriate stance is to retain the status quo. That is what I support in this instance, Mr Deputy Speaker.
MR STEVENSON (11.31): I think good arguments have been put by both sides. This is a matter of concern. We need to ensure on behalf of the community that they have a safe environment. Equally, we need to ensure on behalf of the community that they do not have rights removed. Mr Connolly mentioned that it is the role of members to make up their own minds. I think Mr Connolly would acknowledge that I have never agreed with that idea. That is possibly why we are called representatives or public servants. The role of members of parliament is to ensure first that the constitutional law is followed and then that the expressed will of the majority of the people who hire and pay them is followed. In a minor administrative matter or an urgent matter, as we have sometimes when legislation is being rammed through this Assembly, it is the job of members to use their conscience. Unfortunately, it is not too often that any one of those three situations applies.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .