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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 10 Hansard (24 September) . . Page.. 3223 ..

MRS CARNELL (continuing):

Key findings of the research included that respondents agreed that Canberra is a powerful city and that this power is more than simply political; that there was a particularly strong and positive response to the images of Lone Pine at the War Memorial and the AIS swimmer; and that the proposed campaign "opens your mind to Canberra". On the strength of these extremely positive findings, the Government chose to implement the campaign. I think it is fair to say, judging from the response of Canberrans and others to date, Mr Speaker, that the market research undertaken will turn out to be particularly accurate.

MR SPEAKER: Do you have a supplementary question, Ms Reilly?

MS REILLY: Yes. Part of my question that the Chief Minister did not answer was where this market testing was done.

MRS CARNELL: Mr Speaker, I indicated that the people who were market tested were non-Canberrans. They were people, I understand, who were visiting Canberra. They were people from outside Canberra. This was done by a reputable market researcher. Mr Speaker, I think that really says it all. I am sorry; it was done in Sydney, I am told.

MR OSBORNE: My question is to the Attorney-General, Mr Humphries, and is about compensation for those police officers who were injured in the riots at Parliament House last year. Minister, I noticed in recent news articles that you are expecting the compensation claim to exceed $200,000. At present I understand that this cost will be completely borne by the Territory. Given that the riots were essentially about Federal matters and took place in the Federal parliamentary precinct, why is the ACT liable to pay this compensation? Have you taken any steps to see whether or not the Federal Government would reimburse us for that money?

MR HUMPHRIES: I thank Mr Osborne for that question. I was troubled by many of the implications of the riots at Parliament House in August of last year. I was particularly concerned that ACT taxpayers not be forced to bear a disproportionate burden of the entire exercise that went on there. Mr Speaker, I have spoken before about the many costs that the ACT has had to bear from that. One of those costs was the claims for criminal injuries compensation made by a number of people, particularly by police, who were injured in the course of that demonstration. I think something like 100 police sustained injuries of various sorts in the riots.

I wrote to the Federal Attorney-General, putting it to him that the ACT taxpayers ought not to be bearing the whole cost of those claims when, in fact, all those police were injured in the course of a demonstration against a Federal Government budget. Many of the demonstrators were, in fact, from outside the ACT, and it would be unfair to ask the ACT taxpayers to meet those costs. I have received a response from the Federal Attorney-General. In the course of his response he says:

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