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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 3 Hansard (28 March) . . Page.. 802 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

to "the officer dealt with my son in an inappropriate fashion and did not call me in to attend the interview soon enough", to "I called the police three times; they did not attend to the fire outside the house in my street until 25 minutes after I had rung the police for the first time". I can say, in all honesty, that I have not seen any allegations that lead me to believe that there is any problem at all with corrupt behaviour on the part of Australian Federal Police officers serving in the ACT. I am happy to investigate, even if they are wild claims, claims made by people who could be considered unreliable. I might point out that the person referred to by Mr Moore a moment ago is a person who has confessed to being a corrupt former police officer. If there are claims that are reliable or unreliable - I do not care where they come from - if they come forward they will be investigated. I cannot and will not investigate claims which are not specific to ACT police and which are not clear in expressing any level of corruption by ACT police.

You might be able to construct some sort of argument that says that a person did not attend quickly enough at a crime scene or an incident, for corrupt reasons; but I do not know that that is particularly sustainable. If there is the faintest whiff of smoke I will assume that there is fire and I will have a look. With respect, I do not think it is reasonable to investigate - I repeat that I will investigate if there is a concern - the general amorphous claim that there might be corrupt police in the ACT. It is simply too vague to be able to be followed through.

MR MOORE: I have a supplementary question, Mr Speaker, if I can get a word in before Mr Wood asks his question. Mr Humphries, the issue that I raised and the reason that I chose to use a specific example, or, if you like, a whiff of smoke, was to show what happens when the Ombudsman investigates some matters. Exactly the same thing happened in New South Wales, where the Ombudsman had investigated matters, the internal investigation unit had investigated matters and the ICAC had investigated matters. The outcomes were not as revealed by the New South Wales royal commission. What I would ask you is this: If we can do this - and I am quite happy to get a person to come in and talk to you, if that person is willing - will you encourage your counterpart to set up a royal commission? I realise that the ACT is not likely to be able to afford the style of royal commission that will be necessary to investigate this sort of issue. Would you be prepared to encourage your new Federal counterpart to consider, at least, a royal commission which will, if nothing else, clear the air and ensure that the vast majority of police officers who, we are sure, are all honest are not tainted by these sorts of allegations?

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, I feel encouraged to speak for a little longer than others of my colleagues because I get fewer questions than they do, but let me say - - -

MR SPEAKER: You certainly could not speak for as long as Mr Moore on that.

MR HUMPHRIES: The short answer is that I will be speaking to Mr Williams next week and I will raise with him the question of allegations against the AFP. I will not undertake to urge him to hold a royal commission, because I want to know what the nature of the allegations is in detail. I will certainly say to him that his decision in respect of the Federal Police federally impacts on the Federal Police in the ACT; if there are any problems, he should investigate them fully and appropriately.

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