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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 9 Hansard (21 August) . . Page.. 2542 ..

MR SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr Quinlan, resume your seat for the moment. Mr Quinlan was asked a question, please let him answer it.

MR QUINLAN: This was the government that operated the Quamby centre right next to the periodic detention centre-not a problem; that is different; that was there before. That has some people in it who could be considered to have committed antisocial crimes This is the government that ran the Belconnen Remand Centre-overcrowded and dangerous-right in the middle of Belconnen Town Centre. Not a problem. This is the government that was going to build a jail just up the road.

All I can observe is: what a difference a few metres and an election disappointment makes to an attitude. Now we have Mr Humphries in the Chronicle in crocodile tears over the fact that the periodic detention centre would have some remandees in it. And he has been in the media and in the estimates trying to beat up the fact that there might be very dangerous prisoners.

Mrs Dunne: You could not rule out that high security remandees would go to the PDC. You cannot rule it out, and it goes against everything you said and the commitments you made to the people of Red Hill.

MR QUINLAN: Let's talk about commitments.

MR SPEAKER: Let's just talk about the question.

Mrs Dunne: Mental health is his job. You're talking about the prison.

MR SPEAKER: Mrs Dunne. Please!

MR QUINLAN: Mr Humphries is part of a story. He is beating up the fact that you are now putting a jail near Red Hill. You have now reneged on a promise. Let me read from the policy statement issued by the Labor Party before the election:

Labor will investigate how to relieve the stress at BRC by transferring a number of prisoners who do not require maximum security classification to alternative accommodation in the periodic detention centre.

There is a technicality that every remandee who enters the remand centre is classified, by definition, as maximum security, as much for their own protection as for the protection of society and other people in the remand centre.

However, it is still within the wit of mankind to make some assessments as to the likelihood of getting dangerous prisoners versus non-dangerous prisoners. Mr Humphries, hypocritical as ever and distorting the facts as ever, wants to beat up that-according to Mr Humphries-every remandee in the ACT is apparently an axe murderer. I find that appallingly hypocritical.

And just as an aside to you, Mr Humphries, I also like your "sad day" comment about the demise of Margaret Reid as President of the Senate. I loved the crocodile tears in the paper. Mr Humphries, I love your work.

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