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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 07 Hansard (Thursday, 1 July 2004) . . Page.. 3168 ..

Mrs Burke referred to a lack of confidence. However, Mr Cornwell said earlier in debate that he doubts the safety of children, even if there is mandatory reporting. That was akin to saying that the people who are involved in protecting our kids do not have his confidence. I say to those who are working in the child protection area that they should not worry about gaining the confidence of Mr Cornwell. They will be working in their jobs for a much longer period than he will be a member of parliament in this place.

Mrs Burke stood up in this chamber and babbled on but there was nothing to sustain her argument other than a bagful of wind—and I apologise to members for that cliché. I wish to ask Mrs Burke a simple question. I refer to the report to which Ms Dundas and Ms Tucker refer frequently in this place—the report of the Standing Committee on Community Services and Social Equity on its inquiry into the rights, interests and wellbeing of children. Mr Cornwell was a member of that inquiry and I thank him for his valuable contribution. But where was the shadow minister’s submission and where are the points that she made today with no substance and no justification? Her contribution to that inquiry was noticeably absent. Mrs Burke said that this government has a leadership problem. It does have a leadership problem; it has a lot of leadership from this minister and it has sod all, other than inconsistency, from people across the chamber.

Mrs Burke: Point of order. Mr Hargreaves just used unparliamentary language.

MR HARGREAVES: As it happens, that word is not in the list, Mrs Burke. Mrs Burke should get hold of the list and commit it to memory. Mrs Burke said that the minister’s bureaucrats left her alone when the committee questioned her, which is true. She was left alone because she did not need them. She was exercising leadership. Mrs Burke cannot have it both ways.

Mrs Burke: Neither can you, Mr Hargreaves.

MR HARGREAVES: Mrs Burke might spin on a stick but she still cannot have it both ways. The police are mandated reporters and total reports from mandated reporters amounted to 42 per cent. It is not the intention of this government to remove the reporting requirement. I ask a rhetorical question at this point: What sanctions does Mr Cornwell suggest should be imposed? Is he suggesting that we should take away mandatory reporting? I heard an election promise from him. He said that mandatory reporting was useless and that it would not help kids. So I assume that the Liberals intend to remove that mandatory reporting requirement.

Mrs Burke: No, that is what you are saying; it is not what we are saying.

MR HARGREAVES: What sanctions would opposition members impose? Would they lock up these people in jail? We have to find a way to fill the jail somehow. Let us put in jail all those who tried their hardest to protect the kids but who every now and again made a blue because they are human. What will opposition members do? Will they chop off their hands, stick them in jail and expose them by putting their names in the paper? This matter of public importance is an appalling abuse of the time of this Assembly.

The only reason the shadow minister introduced this matter of public importance was to give the minister an opportunity to demonstrate the difference between the two of them.

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