Page 3215 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 18 October 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
according to your original plan without blowing the budget and that therefore the prison will now house 300 rather than 374. Minister, if 300 is an acceptable number and obviously cheaper to build, why was this not the number in the first place?
MR CORBELL: I find it very interesting that Mr Seselja believes that we are going to fill this prison up overnight. Indeed, Mr Seselja has been in the media in the last couple of days saying, “This is terrible. We’re going to spend all this money and it’s going to be full in 10 years.” I would like to draw Mr Seselja’s attention to the comments made by his leader, Mr Stefaniak. On only 25 September this year, Mr Stefaniak said that the prison should not proceed because the government would not be able to fill it. He criticised the ACT government for not pursuing New South Wales on whether or not their prisoners could be accommodated in our prison. We have this interesting position from the Liberal Party: Mr Stefaniak thinks there are not enough prisoners to justify a prison and Mr Seselja says it will fill up too quickly. This is the sort of confused policy setting that we have from the Liberal opposition.
The numbers are very clear and they are outlined in the most recent Treasury projections, which work on three scenarios. The low scenario assumes that the number of prisoners remains constant over the next 40 years, with a forecast average of 220 sentenced prisoners. The medium scenario assumes a constant imprisonment rate, and here the average number of prisoners is forecast to be 266, and the high scenario assumes a growth in numbers with a forecast average of 275 prisoners in 2043. That is the most recent ACT Treasury projection.
The real challenge is this: do the Liberals believe that we have too many prisoners or not enough? At the moment Mr Seselja says, “There will be too many prisoners; they will fill the jail up too quickly. What a waste of money!” Mr Stefaniak says, “There are not enough prisoners. We will never fill the prison up. What a waste of money!” Mr Speaker, which one is it? Which one is it, Mr Stefaniak? Does Mr Seselja agree with Mr Stefaniak, does Mr Stefaniak agree with Mr Seselja, or is there a third scenario, a third reasoning, that we are yet to hear from the Liberal Party? This just highlights the very sad state of affairs that exists in the Liberal opposition on this project.
On this side of the house we state clearly and categorically that we as a jurisdiction must take responsibility for our sentenced prisoners. We as a jurisdiction must take responsibility for those people who are currently housed in remand facilities that are completely inadequate. We as a jurisdiction have a moral and social obligation to provide a place of proper rehabilitation for people who are sentenced for crimes committed in the ACT. That is what we have set out to achieve.
The real challenge now for the Liberal Party is to explain how they are going to pay for all their election commitments without breaking a legally binding contract on the construction of the Alexander Maconochie Centre.
MR SESELJA: I have a supplementary question, Mr Speaker. Minister, has the provision of a needle exchange and tattoo parlour been approved, and will this be cut given the budget circumstances?
MR CORBELL: No decisions have been made about either of those issues raised by Mr Seselja.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .