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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 9 Hansard (27 August) . . Page.. 2630 ..

MS FOLLETT (continuing):

One other aspect of the trial that I wanted to mention is a matter that has come to my notice in our committee inquiry into the use of surveillance cameras. That matter is the paucity of reliable and objective statistics on just what the problem is that we are trying to get under control. I would urge the Government, in its evaluation of this trial, to have the closest regard to statistical information. In particular, I want statistics on the severity of offences or behaviours that are observed and that are regarded as problems. For instance, we have some statistics available under the heading of assault. We do not know how serious that assault was. Was it a slap on the cheek or did it put somebody in hospital? Was it life threatening? We need to know whether it is just a bit of pushing and shoving or an index finger to the shoulder, which often happens during a heated argument, or a much more serious matter.

We have also seen statistics on general disorder, which can vary from loud arguments to urinating in public and so on - a whole lot of what you might regard as reasonably victimless crimes. It is bad behaviour rather than criminal offences, the sort of bad behaviour that, if you had an alcohol-lubricated party at your home, you would worry about and try to ensure did not happen. You would try to make sure, if you had a large number of people drinking at your home at all hours of the day and night, that none of them got so drunk as to get into a serious argument or forget their usual social graces. We need to tease out those statistics and have a good look at just what it is that is causing offence, what it is that is causing danger, what it is that is taking up police time, what it is that we believe the licensees should be accountable and responsible for, and then insist that they are.

I accept that the trial will go ahead. Now that it is going ahead, let us make it a useful exercise, not just a political exercise in law and order one-upmanship. The tendency to have those kinds of debates on law and order issues has been very much to the detriment of the real safety of our community. I make no bones about saying that the debate that took place during the recent New South Wales election, I thought, was utterly without purpose and had very little to do with the true safety of the community and a lot more to do with political point-scoring. Let us not do that. Let us make this trial a real exercise in community safety, and for that we need extremely reliable and detailed statistical information.

MR MOORE (4.31): Mr Speaker, it gives me pleasure to follow on from Ms Follett. I think most of us would find the issues she raised and the way she put them very useful indeed and would agree with what she had to say. Her premise was that she would prefer not to have had a study in the first place, and I accept that, but she also went on to say that a quick scan of the literature that was included in the literature review and scoping study the Attorney-General tabled indicates views either way. I must say that my own reading prior to this has revealed exactly the same thing. In fact, I have oscillated on this issue quite a number of times. One issue I have felt most uncomfortable with. I was chair of a committee of the Assembly that brought down a report, referred to in this literature review, which said that we should have a restriction on trading hours. After it came down, I did even further study, a number of people spoke to me and I did more reading, and I said that I thought I had made the wrong decision and that I was prepared to change my mind on it.

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