Page 578 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 9 March 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
no doubt that the government made its decision about capacity at the prison based on detailed projections and modelling about overall requirements up to at least the year 2030.
Mr Hanson does not get it, but Ms Bresnan gets it. Indeed, I draw to Mr Hanson’s attention again her comments in Hansard of 7 December where she said, quite rightly:
I find this whole thing a bit of a joke really … It is the flimsiest basis for censure that I have seen the Liberals put up since they have been here. If Mr Hanson does not understand … Yes, the capacity is 300, but for a variety of reasons in the prison you may not be able to have that number. That has been outlined in estimates; it has been outlined in annual reports … There is no debate to have about this.
She was right then and I believe she is right now. He simply does not understand how operational issues affect the overall bed capacity and utilisation on a day-to-day basis.
We also heard the other argument from Mr Hanson about drug testing. There is no doubt that the advice that was provided to me by my officials in relation to the administration of testing by urinalysis of prisoners on admission to the AMC was incorrect. It was incorrect. Ministers can only operate on the basis of accurate advice about how services and programs are being delivered if they are to meet the expectations of this place and its committees and the broader community.
I did what was expected of me as a minister under the code of conduct when this problem came to my attention. It became clear to me that the advice I and my colleague the Chief Minister had provided to the Assembly was incorrect and that it was misleading. It was inadvertently misleading, but it was misleading. So I did what I am required to do in accordance with parliamentary convention, Westminster principles and the ACT ministerial code of conduct—I drew to members’ attention the inadvertent misleading at the earliest possible opportunity. I put it in writing. I apologised for the error and I explained what I am doing about it to make sure it does not happen again.
That is my obligation as a minister, and I have upheld my obligation. And Mr Hanson wants to censure me for that? He wants to censure me for doing my job in the way it is expected that I do my job in those circumstances. He is suggesting it is some failing on my part. It is an absurd suggestion and it is one I reject entirely. Mr Hanson knows the circumstances that led to that advice being incorrectly provided. I have put on the record in this place the documents upon which I and the Chief Minister relied in making those statements to the Assembly. I have nothing to hide on that issue, and I have put all the relevant evidence on the public record.
Why this occurred is now the matter of an independent external investigation. I have commissioned Mr Keith Hamburger, a respected independent reviewer of correctional facilities around the country, to look at the procedures and governance practices within ACT Corrective Services to find out why this occurred, why it was assumed that that procedure was being followed when it was not, and why procedures were not in place to properly monitor the implementation of those policies and procedures. Mr Hamburger will report to me in early April, and I will be putting his report on the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video