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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 11 Hansard (29 November) . . Page.. 3408 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

There is another factor, of course, that is missing here. Ms Tucker has a particular faith in Professor West, because she keeps saying, "If we just let Professor West do it, and work with the coroner, there will be goodwill and we will not have to worry about these problems." But she seems to forget-and I am sure Mr Wood will remember-that the Chief Coroner himself said something to the effect, "I have known Professor West for some 30 years. He is a man whom I like and respect, but I still think we cannot conduct an inquiry under the Inquiries Act parallel to the coronial inquiry."

Remember, the Chief Coroner is not the coroner who will be doing the investigation: Magistrate Somes is going to do it. So it is not a lack of goodwill between Professor West and the Chief Coroner-who told us he had spoken to Professor West.

When we talk about goodwill and so on, it is important for us to remember that it applies across the board. Of course, Ms Tucker also pointed out that she has talked to people in the legal profession, and she has talked to the community. She always says she has talked to the community. What Ms Tucker usually means by this is that she has listened to special interest groups. It is special interest groups who are her sense of the community. Of course, all of us can talk to the legal profession and get the answers we want, because most of us know exactly how to do that, should we wish to.

I think that we do have a process problem here. That is what we are talking about. I emphasise, again, that I am quite comfortable about generating an inquiry into disability services, and I am particularly keen to have an inquiry into some aspects of disability services-the areas that I am not quite sure how to handle. I should also reassure the Assembly that this will not stop us-as I assured them at the meeting yesterday-proceeding to make improvements on things that we can see are wrong.

In fact I have talked to Mr Szwarcbord, the head of Community Care, and my department, about injecting extra funds to deal with specific issues that he believes have been highlighted by concerns that people have raised, and by these deaths. There is another aspect I would like to consider, and to do that I will read from the Government Solicitor's letter with regard to the interference of a committee of inquiry with the coronial inquiry. It does not apply to this one. It was written in 1997 with a clear intention of dealing with the issues between Major General Smethurst and the coroner.

The then ACT Government Solicitor, Mr Peedom, wrote:

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