Page 5169 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 27 October 2010

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video

---

In relation to recommendation 3, “that the AFP reports in detail on use of force in its annual report, including action taken on inappropriate instances of use of force”, I think the AFP in its annual report does report on instances of use of force, but cannot deal with issues around complaints, as complaints are matters that are dealt with through a separate process which is reported on by the relevant oversight agencies.

I am not sure whether there is any deficiency in relation to either of those recommendations, but as a constructive way of moving forward I suggest, Mr Rattenbury, that I arrange for the Chief Police Officer to provide you with a briefing. Obviously, if there are issues arising out of that that you feel need to be addressed, we can have a further discussion and debate in this place, but I think in the first instance that may be the most effective way of trying to address your concerns.

The government remains committed to a high level of accountability and transparency in the operations of ACT Policing. The arrangements that we have in place through the contract that we have with the Australian Federal Police for the purchase of policing services for the territory are, I consider, the best in the country. There is a very clear separation between the purchaser and the provider of the service. There is a very clear set of performance criteria that police have to meet, and that is spelt out in detail in public documents and reported on publicly at regular intervals. That is not what you could claim for every police service in the country. In fact, for most police services in the country you just do not get that level of accountability and transparency in the delivery of services.

So I think we have a good model. We have an ACT Policing leadership team that is committed to that level of transparency and openness, committed to providing detailed advice and assistance to members of the Assembly where they do have questions, queries or concerns. And of course there are the more formal processes of scrutiny of ACT Policing’s delivery of its services through the relevant standing committees and select committees of this place.

That provides a very strong framework of oversight. It is an appropriate framework of oversight, one the government supports. I would be happy to arrange for a further briefing for Mr Rattenbury should he so wish.

Question put:

That Mr Rattenbury’s amendment to Mr Corbell’s proposed amendment be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

---

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video