Page 971 - Week 03 - Thursday, 30 March 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
(18) How does the ACT Policing’s fleet of 180 vehicles for 791.5 staff, as outlined on page 82, Facilities and Logistics, compare with (a) NSW, (b) Victoria, (c) and to similar sized towns such as Wollongong, Ballarat and Bendigo;
(19) What is meant by the statement on page 82 that the Finance, Exhibits, and Logistics portfolio has been subject to a review during financial year 2004-2005 and following this review roles within the Exhibit portfolio have been upgraded and all team members’ positions across the portfolio have now been diversified to provide for increased redundancy in service delivery;
(20) Further to the statement on page 82 that the portfolio will continue to improve productivity, efficiency, and working conditions within the Exhibits Team in order to improve service delivery to ACT Policing and external stakeholders, who are the external stakeholders and what do they pay for the service delivery;
(21) Is ACT Policing subject to the ACT Discrimination Act; if not, why not;
(22) Does page 91 state that the role of the Workforce Planning model is to provide feedback and clarification on determining ACT Policing’s ability to support the AFP’s national and international operations; if so, (a) is Workforce Planning intended to support ACT Policing or the AFP and (b) why should ACT Policing’s ability to support the AFP’s national and international operations be any consideration to ACT taxpayers;
(23) Does page 92 note that the staffing profile is characterized by young, energetic and well educated people; if so, (a) assuming young people have less experience in the police force, why doesn’t ACT Policing have a balance of age groups, (b) is ACT Policing a training ground for the AFP and if so, why doesn’t AFP pay for the training experience, rather than the other way around;
(24) Does the Chief Police Officer only spend 90% of her time on ACT Policing as indicated on page 92, table 3.1; if so, (a) does the ACT Government pay 100% of the Chief Police Officer’s salary and (b) is the Chief Police Officer paid by the ACT Government for full time work or at a rate of 0.9 of full-time work;
(25) Does the Deputy Chief Police Officer only spends 30% of his time on ACT Policing; if so, (a) does the ACT Government pay 100% of the Deputy Chief Police Officer’s salary and (b) is the Deputy Chief Police Officer paid by the ACT Government for full time work or at a rate of 0.33 of full-time work;
(26) Why is there no ACT Policing representative on the recruitment panel as referred to on page 92, Recruitment;
(27) In relation to page 94 of the report, (a) why did ACT Policing decide not to analyse the complaints, as a learning tool, as it did in other sections of its annual report, (b) why did ACT Policing decide to just report the bare statistics, (c) what was the nature(s) of the three complaints that were advised to pursue elsewhere, (d) what was the outcome, for example, dismissal, suspension, docking of pay, of the four substantiated cases, (e) how do the outcomes of the four substantiated cases compare with substantiated cases in previous years, (f) what was the outcome of the special investigation conducted by the Ombudsman about ACT Policing matters and (g) how does the outcome of the Ombudsman’s special investigation compare with any similar investigation in previous years;
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .