Page 2775 - Week 08 - Thursday, 24 August 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Let us have a look at counterterrorist laws and the counterterrorist capability. There is clearly insufficient funding in the 2006-07 budget to undertake preventative policing work of both a domestic and a counterterrorist nature. This lack of concern represents the Stanhope civil liberties priorities, of which we have just had a massive demonstration. He trembles at the thought of offending community minorities but seems to take a perverse enjoyment out of neglecting the safety of the broader community. Are we paying our penances, boys and girls, for the sins of our fathers, perhaps? What drives this Chief Minister in terms of his priorities? Mr Stanhope still does not care to ban offensive, inflammatory and dangerous materials that are aimed at killing his own community.
The London train bombings spurred Australians into action. The bombings of last year stirred governments and people across this country into toughening this country’s counterterrorist laws. But not Jon Stanhope! Jon Stanhope alone has still not bedded down what should have been sensible laws. We are now many, many months away from a wake-up call and still do not have in place sensible laws to protect this community.
I will talk briefly about police numbers. We will support this line item because we are grateful that at least 60new police, added to the 20 already in the pipeline, will be added to the force. In this year’s budget, identified in budget paper No 3, page 89, we see that the Stanhope government have allocated $30 million over four years for an additional 60. That effectively adds to the other 20, and they say that that means this will be an effective additional 80 police by 2008-09. That is good. Mr Corbell, well done; you have finally achieved what your predecessor refused to attempt to achieve for about four years.
However, we have a number of questions. This figure would seem impressive but for the fact that we need twice, possibly three times now, as many police to have adequate police resources. Perhaps twice as many more are all that we can afford over another four or five years. Maybe if the Stanhope government did not build that white elephant of a prison, we would be able to fund some of the infrastructure or the capital costs that might be needed to better support an increase in police services. This increase in actual police numbers will occur over a number of years. One hundred and eighty-six is the actual shortfall now, according to expert reports in the AFPA. One hundred and eighty-six is something that we can dream about. Perhaps we cannot afford that for some time to come, but that is the benchmark that expert commentators have put up as the gap that this community one day is going to have to breach to be able to provide for the full needs that the community requires in community policing.
There are serious doubts about new recruitments not being neutralised by wastage, although the police minister has denied that this will be a problem. This is something that we would like to monitor very, very closely. Feedback from the AFPA, from other police federation associated groups, from current police and from ex-police is that retention over the last four years has not been keeping pace with recruitments. For the last four years, particularly in respect of retaining experienced front-line constables and patrol sergeants, the wastage rates have not been kept abreast of by recruitments. The minister said in estimates that that is no longer a problem. The opposition will watch very closely to see whether that capability is going to be rebuilt.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .