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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 3 Hansard (27 March) . . Page.. 703 ..

MR WHITECROSS: I wish to ask a supplementary question, Mr Speaker. Minister, given that presumably your counterparts in the Federal Parliament would have given exactly the same answer as you just gave before the 60 Minutes interview and given the obvious concern of Commissioner Palmer about the structure which operated in the ACT up until recently, as he has changed the structure and identified that a tendency towards the structure being conducive to corruption was a concern which led him to change the structure, do you not believe that it would be appropriate for you to order some sort of inquiry to reassure the ACT community that there is not a problem in the ACT, if you are right, and to ensure that ACT police officers who are working diligently in the service of the community are not besmirched by these vague allegations and by the concern that might be created by the fact that you are saying that you will not order an inquiry until a specific allegation comes to light?

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, the question I would pose rhetorically to Mr Whitecross is: Into what would I order an inquiry? There have not been any allegations concerning the conduct of police serving in the ACT Region in respect of their ACT duties that I am aware of.

Mr Moore: Yes, there have.

MR HUMPHRIES: There has been one allegation in relation to a serving AFP officer in this region at the moment in relation to something that happened on Christmas Island some years ago. I do not really have the jurisdiction or the capacity to order an inquiry into an event that happened on Christmas Island several years ago; nor should I. It is, with respect, of no concern to the ACT - except perhaps that there are now officers who were involved in that, or who may have been involved in something wrong at that stage, who are serving in the ACT. If you expect me to launch a kind of pre-emptive strike to investigate allegations which have not actually been made in respect of the ACT, I would say that you are defeating the purpose which you have just stated you are intent on supporting, which is to clear these people of allegations made against them.

Ms McRae: Why did you restructure, then, if there is no problem?

MR HUMPHRIES: Another point has been raised. Why have we restructured? We have restructured to achieve efficiency and a better outcome. I cannot understand this. Mr Whitecross says, "Take your pre-emptive step and have an investigation". Ms McRae asks why I have taken a pre-emptive step of restructuring the AFP. It is only seven minutes into question time, Mr Speaker, and my head is already spinning. I cannot work this out. When you people have worked out what you are saying - - -

Members interjected.

Mr Berry: Mr Speaker, it would help the Opposition if we could hear the Minister above the cacophony created by his colleagues.

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