Page 1420 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 6 April 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Of course these are all aspects of the report which the opposition chooses to ignore today. The Hamburger report in essence applauds the steps that this government has taken to operate in a best practice way, to actually create a model prison in terms of our commitment to human rights and our inalienable commitment to the prospect of rehabilitation and a belief that the overarching philosophy is that, whilst punishing those that are incarcerated for their offences against society, there is the prospect in each of us, the capacity, for redemption and rehabilitation; that we can restore people to the community as useful members of the community and that we can restore them to the community through a human rights based process that deals with the prospect of recidivism, a major issue for all corrections systems throughout Australia.
It is important in this debate to reflect on the Liberal Party’s own position in relation to corrections. It is worth in a motion such as this, a censure against a minister for corrections who has established in the view of Mr Hamburger a prison which has the capacity to reflect best practice in the world, that has the building blocks, has the capacity, has the potential and with this government’s commitment will reflect best practice in the world—
Mr Hanson: Maybe when we are in government it will.
MR STANHOPE: Mr Hanson says when they are in government. Let us reflect on what the Liberal Party would have done had they been in government. It is in their policy platforms; it is in their public positions. They would have retained the Belconnen Remand Centre as the ACT government’s central corrections facility. What was the Liberal Party’s position in relation to the construction and the development of the Alexander Maconochie Centre and the philosophy of human rights that underpins it? The Liberal Party did not want the prison built. They agitated against it. Mr Smyth—I still have the image in my mind—attended the site and joined a protest against its construction.
The Liberal Party voted en masse against the Human Rights Act, the basic principle that underpins the philosophy inherent in what we are seeking to deliver at Alexander Maconochie—a human rights compliant prison; the only one in Australia and one of only a handful in the world. And that is the starting position. You have to reflect on that and understand the depths of the cynicism, the strength of the cynicism—
Mr Hanson interjecting—
MR SPEAKER: Order! Mr Stanhope, one moment thank you. Stop the clocks. Mr Hanson, thank you. Chief Minister.
MR STANHOPE: Well there we have it. The Liberal Party’s case apparently is based on an editorial in the Canberra Times. I have no doubt that the author of that editorial, having not seen or had the advantage of the Hamburger report, is now incredibly embarrassed to have to claim ownership of it. We have the day before the release of the Hamburger report a very courageous journalist writing an editorial which of course is blown completely out of the water the next day by one of the most experienced corrections officials in Australia, namely Mr Keith Hamburger. I think it would be interesting to have a conversation today, the day after the release of the Hamburger report with that particular Canberra Times journalist in relation to his—
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video