Page 1015 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 30 March 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I am going to run out of time here, but let me say, as I did at the very beginning, I regard those people who choose to work at Bimberi as honourable people and I support them in their work. What has been said to me is that, following Mrs Dunne’s continued allegations about Bimberi made yesterday, they now feel stressed and unhappy. They feel like they cannot stand up with pride and say, “I’m a youth detention worker at Bimberi.” I want them to wake up of a morning and say, “I’m going to work today with pride at Bimberi Youth Justice Centre to make a difference to these young people’s lives.” The constant hysteria that comes from Mrs Dunne is not helping them to achieve that.
The roles of the Human Rights Commission and the Children and Young People Commissioner are defined in law. The commission has the powers to conduct a review and to investigate allegations arising from the review where victimisation has been alleged. The Bimberi review is underway by the right authority. The commission understands the human rights of young people in detention as well as the rights of staff. In December of last year we agreed to the Human Rights Commission undertaking the review of the commission. The Assembly should just allow the Human Rights Commission to complete the work that it has set out to do.
MR SESELJA (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (10.32): Mr Speaker, the first question that we have to ask is this: if the minister is right and the process is working well, why are so many voices saying that this process is a sham? Why is it that these people would put themselves on the line, would come out publicly? We know the difficulty of taking on a government publicly, for public servants in particular. They do not do that lightly. They do not do that normally on the basis of a lie. They do it when they feel that they have no other option and that is what we are seeing here.
So we have on the one hand the minister saying, “No, there is nothing to see here. The process is working fine. Everyone has been told to speak freely.” But we see the evidence pointing in exactly the opposite direction. We see the minute, the documentary evidence of this corrupted process—the documentary evidence that this process is a sham, that this inquiry has been prevented from doing its work and getting to the bottom of the issues at Bimberi.
We have heard it before, but I will repeat it again. What this minute says is that there is:
High probability that officers from our unit will be approached to contribute to the review. Officers are urged if they … approached to consult with … to work out a strategy prior to responding.
What other possible meaning could we put on a minute like that, other than that the government is keen to talk to people before they go and appear before the inquiry so that they get their lines straight? What other possible explanation is there? The only explanation we have had from the government is that it was a poor choice of words. I suppose it was a poor choice of words for the government. What we have here is someone finally putting in writing what we know is actually happening. That is the point here. It is not just the clear documentary evidence that makes it so clear that this
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video