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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 07 Hansard (Tuesday, 29 June 2004) . . Page.. 2912 ..

It is a sorry saga how the government could have handled this better and did not, and I have great suspicions about whether they are fair dinkum about building this much needed facility. If it is built by then, there will be potential for further motor sports activity in the Majura Valley, which has now been mentioned in various studies as being the best site for such activity because it is very close to being under the flight path.

I now mention another aspect of the report, which you, Mr Deputy Speaker, referred to. It relates to comment in the committee’s Territory as parent report. The case you refer to is a classic case in point. There were eight different mandated persons, any one of whom, had they reported the incident correctly, might well have enabled this six-year-old girl’s life to be saved.

I am getting a little bit tired of the minister trying to blame the former government. This act came into effect in about May 2000, for her edification, and I ceased to be minister for family services on December the 15th and in fact took over A-G’s then. For her further edification, I have had several detailed conversations with the Community Advocate, some very late in the term of the last government. I recall a very lengthy conversation in my office not long before the caretaker period. The Community Advocate was very concerned about the Gallop inquiry, and she had ample opportunity to mention the other concerns but did not.

When I look at the chronology of the report by Cheryl Vardon, I think the government is really clutching at straws in trying to blame the former government. It will say, “You didn’t resource it enough.” Well, Mr Deputy Speaker, we did not have a huge amount of money when we became the government. The evidence there indicates that, out of all areas, that one was resourced and had the resourcing increased. The figure of 50 per cent was mentioned at some stage during estimates.

I am pleased to see that now, after all this has occurred, this government is putting further money into this area. But the point, Mr Deputy Speaker, that you made in your speech before lunchtime and the point I make today is that, whilst resourcing will cure a lot of ills, it cannot do everything. It cannot ensure that people are responsible for their own actions. People do need to be responsible for their own actions.

One thing that worries me about this government is that it is very selective about who should be responsible for their own actions. The excuse used for people who quite clearly had not done their job would not be used by the government for a business that had not complied with occupational health and safety laws and regulations. When eight different people who were meant to take certain action did not, quite clearly there is a role for the Public Sector Management Act and, indeed, a duty for government to investigate under that act and take whatever action is needed as a result. That is something that is always rather sad to do, and I had to do it once as Minister for Education. But it is the duty of a government to ensure that that actually occurs. This government has certainly failed in that and, from the response we have here to recommendation 18 of the committee’s report, it does not seem to have any intention of doing it.

I would point out to the government in relation to this area that I have had a look at the Vardon report. It details a number of incidents where children have been at risk. These

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