Page 1314 - Week 04 - Thursday, 4 May 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
(4) Are people turned away from making reports to police because there are limited staff available to take a statement; if so, why are sufficient resources not in place to address this issue.
Mr Barr: The answer to the member’s question is as follows:
(1) No appointment is required for persons wishing to report a new incident. If the person is, however, seeking to make a statement in relation to an existing investigation it is appropriate that an appointment be made with the case officer.
(2) No. Persons are not turned away from police stations when wishing to report a new matter. It may be that an appointment will be made for later attendance by police. If the person is, however, wishing to make a statement in relation to an existing investigation they may be requested to attend at a later time to speak with the case officer. It is not best practice for statements to be made to officers who have less than full knowledge of an investigation. In exceptional circumstances, such as limited availability of the witness or case officer, such statements will be taken by other officers after appropriate briefing in the matter.
(3) None. Refer to the answer to question 2.
(4) No. Generally mutually convenient appointments are made between the complainant/witness and the case officer/relevant member in order to maximise the efficiency of the process and quality of the statement.
Firelink contract—tenders
(Question No 1022)
Mr Pratt asked the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, upon notice, on 29 March 2006 (redirected to the Treasurer):
Further to question on notice No 1016, did the Government Procurement Board place a ceiling on the value of the contract, reference number 04/5654, to Australian Technology Information Pty Ltd for Firelink technology; if so, what was the value of this ceiling; if not, why not.
Mr Stanhope: The answer to the member’s question is as follows:
1. The Board did not ‘place a ceiling on the value of the contract’. The Board endorsed the procurement plan, as proposed by the ACT Emergency Services Authority, which included reference to an estimated total consideration of up to $4.5 million (including GST).
As a matter of policy, the Board requires that it be notified by agencies of any contracts, over $1 million, which exceed the estimated total consideration of the original procurement by 10% or greater. No notifications were received in regard to this project because the final contract value was within the original procurement plan estimate.
Industrial relations—bullying
(Question No 1024)
Mrs Burke asked the Chief Minister, upon notice, on 29 March 2006:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .