Page 1127 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 8 April 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR HARGREAVES: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I thank you for your guidance, because these guys are going to get it for the rest of the term.
A number of things need to be put on the record about this. This classic class of clowns over here said, “We said three years ago to do it.” They did not. They came in here and said, “You have to adopt the Victorian method.” They were rejected in 2005, because there was no academic rigour around the research. The other jurisdictions had not picked it up; it was just a red-necked approach to make sure that we can ping people for taking drugs.
Let us go through this list here. Victoria passed theirs in 2003.
Mr Pratt What a bag of wind!
MR SPEAKER: Stop the clock, please, Clerk. Minister, resume your seat. Members of the opposition, my patience is about to run out. Cease your interjections. Mr Hargreaves, I directed you to put your comments through the chair.
MR HARGREAVES: I am.
MR SPEAKER: I insist that you do that.
MR HARGREAVES: I am doing that to the best of my ability, and I will continue.
MR SPEAKER: Do not be distracted; do not let yourself be distracted.
MR HARGREAVES: Mr Speaker, I will not be. Good advice, thanks, Mr Speaker. New South Wales—when did they introduce their legislation? December 2006. South Australia—they put in RDT for THC and methamphetamine in July 2006 and for MDMA in September 2006. When did Queensland do it? February 2007. When did the NT do it? In 2006. When did Western Australia do it? August 2007. I told this chamber that we were waiting to see what the other jurisdictions do.
Mr Pratt: Oh, yeah.
MR SPEAKER: I warn you, Mr Pratt.
MR HARGREAVES: Those opposite do not remember me saying so. Nor do those opposite remember me saying that I wanted to see some academic rigour around it. I also wanted to see its efficacy at court. We have seen all of those; now the government has been prepared to move.
The watching brief we have had on it has now been concluded. We are now in a position to go to the people of the ACT and talk about it. Do they talk about their consultation process, Mr Speaker? Do they say “community groups”? I will wager that they have not spoken to the family and friends of drug law reform. I will wager that. I will wager that their consultation process has been particularly selective.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .