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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 5 Hansard (9 May) . . Page.. 1294 ..

MR MOORE: Mr Speaker, on 8 March Mr Rugendyke asked me a question about alleged missing alcohol and drug program client records and I thought it would be in the interests of him and Assembly members to hear where we have got to with that. At the time I said the alcohol and drug program had conducted audits; however we could not be sure about archived files.

I would now like to provide the Assembly with further information. The alcohol and drug program has audited archived files and there do not appear to be any records missing. The records that cannot be audited, however, are those archived files over 10 years old that the program culled to be destroyed. It is not possible to conduct an audit as the alcohol and drug program records simply show them as destroyed. There is no way of knowing whether the records were removed prior to being placed in the security or waste bin. So we do believe there are none missing, but there is that one possible gap.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, on 14 October last year the answer to question on notice No 187 asked of me by Mr Osborne appeared in Hansard. Part of that answer related to how and when camera systems are used, and in relation to ACTION I answered that cameras operate all day and, where the function is provided, the cameras record after hours.

Part of that answer may have been misleading to the Assembly, unintentionally. I am advised that the cameras operated by ACTION do operate all day and have the facility to record after hours but in fact do not actually do so after hours. The error was a result of misunderstanding on the part of ACTION of the question that was put to them. I apologise for that mistake and I have now corrected the record.

MR SPEAKER: Members, during the Assembly consideration of the motion to take note of report No 9 of the Standing Committee on Justice and Community Safety on 28 March, I undertook to consider comments made in the dissenting report of Mr Hargreaves and report to the Assembly on the matter. There are two issues that I propose to address. The first relates to publication of the report beyond the members of the Assembly.

As the Assembly did not authorise publication of the report and, having considered the contents of the dissent, advice was sort as to whether publication of the report and the dissent beyond members of the Assembly was potentially actionable. Absolute privilege applies to publication of the report to members but not to the wider publication of the

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