Page 825 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 9 March 2005
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
services minister, before Mr Moore got it, was to make sure they got, I think it was, $15,000. It might have been $20,000. I just pestered him for a month to make sure he then actually honoured that commitment, which he did.
I was concerned last year to see Neighbourhood Watch again in desperate financial straits. They are sponsored. I think Mr Bob Newham and his organisation, which is a security organisation, a locksmiths organisation—a very appropriate one—are very generously sponsoring them. I think that amounts to about $20,000 a year for a number of years. I would urge the government, on the question of finances, to ensure that this organisation is supported. You do not need a huge amount of money, and something around $20,000 a year would make a huge difference; it would really assist them. In terms of where it should come from: as I said earlier, I recall we did it once to assist, out of the community services funds.
There is another area, I would suggest, which really fits in here very well, and that is the crime prevention programs. They started, I think as specific programs, back in about 2000-2001. I think the government a couple of years ago set aside $1.1 million. They did not spend it all because the programs simply were not there. A lot of them are not developed by police. I recall Ms Dundas actually last year bemoaning the fact that, for the last financial year, which I think was 2003-2004, only $450,000 out of the $1.4 million—it might have been $1.1 million—was spent. I think they might have put too much in the program, but only about $450,000 out of that $1.1 million had actually been spent at the end of the financial year. That seemed to be a bit of a perennial problem.
Take $20,00 or $25,000 out of the crime prevention program fund. I would strongly suggest to the government that that is an ideal area. I am assuming they are not going to cut that fund. Certainly it is a fund you would never actually completely manage to use. I must say the previous government did not. I think when Mr Humphries and I announced it that first year there still were not enough programs. It has always had a bit of money left over at the end of the financial year. Quite clearly there is capacity in that fund to fund Neighbourhood Watch on a permanent basis and overcome these hiccups, humps and dramas we have had a couple of times now where they look like folding because they simply cannot get $20,000 to keep them going. We are not always going to have Tattersall’s, the NRMA or the Bob Newhams of this world to necessarily come to the party and bail them out. And they are such an important organisation. I really stress that to the government.
As I said, I have been to quite a few meetings. I recall making a point of going to all the Belconnen Neighbourhood Watches when I was a minister in the previous government. Apart from the normal crime prevention stuff that they do, they were also very handy in terms of just being the eyes and ears of the community on things like the rates, roads and rubbish issues, the potholes. By attending there, I was made aware of a number of problems, which I arranged with Urban Services, through their minister, to actually fix up. So there are a number of roles they can play. I certainly encourage members to go to Neighbourhood Watch meetings because you will learn a lot more than just crime in the particular area.
Another concern I have had over the years, but specifically now in recent times, is the fact that the police often do not attend—certainly do not attend regularly but in some
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .