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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 5 Hansard (27 August) . . Page.. 1465 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

a decision about this. You have accused me already of lying about this. Now you are saying, "You must have had it at the time you went before the Estimates Committee but I think I had probably better ask you whether you actually did have it at the time the Estimates Committee was meeting". No, I did not.

MR BERRY: Many thanks. He told me he had it. That is all I really wanted to know. I ask whether the Minister has explained to the Chief Minister why he breached the code of conduct for Ministers, which states on page 2:

Ministers shall uphold the laws of the Australian Capital Territory and Australia, and shall not be party to their breach, evasion or subversion.

If not, will you explain what you intend to do about this breach?

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, first of all, I answered this question yesterday when it was asked in another form by Mr Kaine. Secondly, if Mr Berry is telling me that he would not do precisely the same thing in precisely the same circumstances, then I will be a monkey's uncle.

MR HARGREAVES: Mr Speaker, my question is to the Minister for Justice and Community Safety. It does not refer to the Ayers report. Can the Minister say whether the Government has agreed with the Australian Federal Police Association that there should be a trial to test the assumption surrounding the proposed redeveloped Woden Police Station? If so, what are the timelines associated with such a trial, and who will conduct the trial?

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, I have put the proposal both to the AFP hierarchy and to the AFPA. At this stage I have not had a formal response from either group as to what it proposes to do. I must say that I sense a certain reluctance to embark on the trial from one or both parties.

MR HARGREAVES: I ask a supplementary question, Mr Speaker. Will the Minister table the terms of reference for the trial when they are developed? I accept the Minister's response to my question, but I assume that a formal set of references will be established. Will you advise whether, in the Government's view, the trial will be open to public input?

MR HUMPHRIES: About the first part of the question, as I say, I have not had a response yet from the two parties I proposed the trial to, so it is a bit hard for me to tell you what I have to agree with them about in respect of the trial. They have not indicated to me what they wish to do with the proposal, so I cannot really tell you what we are going to do with it. Secondly, as for public input, this is proposed as a trial of police procedures to test a number of propositions. For example, does the reconfiguration of the police districts in the ACT result in quicker response times? I am not quite sure what public input can contribute to that process. Measuring police response times is an empirical matter which has to be done by checking records of incidents rather than

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