Page 2213 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 9 May 2012

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


There are a number of examples that illustrate that an investigation into bail reform is necessary in the ACT. It is quite clear from the research I have done and the research Mrs Dunne has done that there are extensive examples. We have been very careful today, and Mrs Dunne has been very careful, not to raise matters that are potentially sub judice. She has related a couple of instances to me where her research has shown the revolving door of bail is alive and well here in the ACT. Quite clearly, in some instances it is putting the safety of the community at risk.

It is relevant to talk about the recent tragedy that occurred on Yamba Drive simply to say that we all express our deepest sympathies for those concerned—the family and the friends of the lady who was sadly killed in the tragic incident and for the other lady who was injured. The community wants to know that we in this place are doing everything we can to make sure that an incident like this does not happen again.

If there is a concern in the community—and there is—about bail provisions, it is our responsibility in this place to get to the bottom of the matter when it comes to how bail is being enforced in this jurisdiction and whether the provisions are adequate for those who are enforcing them. We are not going to be able to do that without information. We have had traffic consequences; we have had the community calling for action; we have Mrs Dunne saying: “Well, let’s get the information. Let’s not overreach. Let’s not knee jerk. Let’s get the information so we can make a considered decision and have a considered response.” She has been very careful in her language and it is a very considered motion.

What are we getting from the government and what are we getting from the Greens? It is too hard. It is not that they cannot give us the information—and Mr Corbell and Mr Rattenbury acknowledge that—but what they are saying is that it is too hard. Somebody would need to go through the records manually. Somebody would have to actually do some work to get that information. That is information that, quite clearly, the community is demanding to know. They want to know why it is that, from their perspective, bail appears to be a revolving door in this jurisdiction.

Is it? Well, it appears to be. Everybody you speak to in the community thinks it is, and what Mrs Dunne is saying in this motion today is, “Let’s find out.” As a result of Mr Corbell’s amendment and as a result of Mr Rattenbury’s amendment to Mr Corbell’s amendment, we are not going to know the answer to that. We will not know, will we? We do not know if bail is a problem or not. Perhaps the government likes it that way. Perhaps the Greens like it that way. We know they like continuing resolution 10 that constrains us from speaking about bail provisions in this place in an adequate sense. We are constrained about talking about essentially anything the community is talking about.

As we saw from the Companion to the Standing Orders, we are foolish to constrain ourselves when matters are being debated elsewhere. We are, as a result of this place, looking like fools. We cannot talk about cases before the court in any regard, despite the fact that the community is. The community raises serious concerns with all of us, I am sure, about bail provisions and Mrs Dunne puts a very sensible motion before the Assembly asking for information, and the response from this government is, “We’re not going to tell you because it’s too hard.” It is not that it is not possible, but because it is too hard. The consequence of this is dire for the community and its safety.


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