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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 9 Hansard (1 September) . . Page.. 2724 ..

MR OSBORNE (continuing):

The coroner, as I read it, recommended an urgent inquiry into the mix of children at Quamby, the need for careful selection and training of staff to manage Quamby, and whether or not it is appropriate to contain within the one institution all of the types of people currently held at Quamby. He also recommended a change in the administrative arrangements so that Quamby came under the same portfolio as adult justice - that is, a change from the Education portfolio to Justice and Community Safety. He suggested that such a change might usefully be part of any other inquiry about Quamby.

I have to say that I cannot support a motion which forces the Government to reverse their decision. I have to say though that the way in which it was done left me a little bit concerned. Obviously it was done as part of the major restructure within the different portfolio responsibilities of the Ministers; in particular, the Chief Minister relinquishing the role of Treasurer. However, what concerned me was the lack of consultation with the different groups involved, in particular, the Official Visitor and also people within the indigenous population here in Canberra. It is quite clear that of the tenants at Quamby, for want of a better term, the indigenous representation is far greater than it is in the Assembly, so they obviously do have some concerns about what goes on there and about how young people, in particular Aboriginal young people, are dealt with.

I hope I have confused everybody, Mr Speaker, as to what I am going to do because I think I have just confused myself. I am open to supporting some motion which perhaps sends the message that we are not happy with the process, but I do not know what supporting this motion will do, given that I am not prepared to force the Government to do anything. Will it achieve anything if we call on the Government to do something when quite clearly they have indicated that they will not? In discussions that I have had with the Attorney-General he did say to me - correct me if I am wrong - that if the Education Committee came back later and suggested that it go back to Education the Government would then do it. Did you not say that to me?

Mr Humphries: We would take the recommendation very seriously.

Ms Tucker: You said in the Assembly that you would put it back.

MR OSBORNE: Hang on; it has changed now.

Ms Tucker: No, he did say it in the Assembly. I heard him say it too. He said he would put it back.

Mr Humphries: Not quite that blatantly.

Ms Tucker: No, I thought you would back away from it, but that was the impression you gave, definitely.

Mr Humphries: No, I do not think it was, Ms Tucker.

MR OSBORNE: Well, that was my reading of it, Mr Humphries. So the Government will not accept the motion, but they will accept committee recommendations. Anyway, I do not know what this motion will achieve when the Government have made it very clear that they will ignore it.

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