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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 3 Hansard (27 May) . . Page.. 670 ..

MR OSBORNE (continuing):

my staff pointed out that I had made similar calls in 1995 and 1996. In 1997 I saved my comments on it for the estimates process. But the Minister will take note that this motion is more serious than any of those that went before in 1995 and 1996.

This time I am calling on him and the Government not to sign the new police contract with the Commonwealth until we have some agreement from the Commonwealth on legislation enabling us, the Territory, to appoint a police commissioner for the ACT. I do so because I believe that the Commonwealth has treated the ACT with contempt in the existing police arrangements, and it is high time we started to get a bit tougher in our negotiations with the Commonwealth over the contract. We spend $57m a year on police in the ACT; yet, for all intents and purposes, we have very limited control over our police force, as we are in effect renting the service from the Commonwealth. The reality is that the Minister for police in the ACT is not Mr Humphries; it is in fact Mr Williams.

We have been asking for a local police commissioner for some time. In September 1995 the Legal Affairs Committee, which I was a member of, handed down a report on the future of policing in the Territory. It was a unanimous report, I might add. One of the four recommendations was that the ACT Government consult the Commonwealth in order to change legislation to provide for the statutory appointment of an ACT police commissioner by the middle of 1996 - two years ago. After hearing all the submissions, the committee unanimously agreed that the best thing for the people of Canberra was for them to have a police commissioner who was answerable to this Assembly on all matters of police policy. The Federal Attorney-General then showed the now customary contempt of the Commonwealth for the Territory on this issue when he announced that he was not willing even to discuss it. I note Mr Humphries's comment on this decision when he said:

This is a very disappointing development. The Commonwealth Government has demonstrated a lack of serious commitment to accountable police management for the people of Canberra.

The Australian Federal Police provide services under contract to the ACT Government, but all parties in the Assembly wanted to see a more accountable mechanism created for policing activities here in the Territory.

Then I wrote to the Estimates Committee to see whether it would call Mr Williams to appear before it, both to explain and to clarify his position, and also in his capacity as the Minister responsible for the AFP and therefore the police in the Territory. Surprise, surprise, this did not happen, although I believe that it is entirely proper for the Assembly's Estimates Committee to call the Federal Minister, as that Minister is taking money from us and is supposed to be providing a service. If we are not satisfied with the service we have every right to question the contractor. As he was the Minister responsible for police, I was very keen to hear from Mr Williams what he thought about the safety house program here in the ACT, how he thought it was going, what he thought about the crime figures, and what he thought about the rise in certain incidents here in the ACT. As I said, he is our police Minister. It would have been very interesting to have had the opportunity to speak to him.

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