Page 3751 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 29 October 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
enable them to do their job to the best of their ability and in as much safety as possible. Whilst tasers may be a somewhat safer alternative to handguns, there are still significant risks associated with the expansion of the use of tasers. I expressed the concern, and I continue to share that view, that the expansion of taser deployment would result in reliance on their use and have the potential to cause escalation in conflicts and potentially an increase in use.
Minister Corbell has today cited the 2012 New South Wales Ombudsman report. I have also had a look at that in my preparation for today’s discussion. There are a range of very interesting findings in that. It shows that this is not a black-and-white issue; there remains complexity to it. They did note, in the particular context, that also of concern is the potential that an overreliance on tasers will diminish police officers’ skills in important areas such as communication, negotiation and weaponless control. There is much more to that report. I simply draw that point out to make the observation that, personally, my view is that we need to place greater emphasis on those sorts of skills rather than simply adding to the weaponry available to police officers.
I am not saying that those should not be available in some circumstances, but I think it is about trying to find a balance in some of the statistical evidence we are seeing. Certainly the Ombudsman’s report identifies areas where tasers were used inappropriately. It highlights the number of people with mental health problems where tasers were used. And recently there were comments in the media here in the ACT about concerns about the use of tasers on people with mental health problems and whether there are better ways to deal with people who have mental health problems than having the potential risks presented by tasers.
So in some senses my views have not changed since 2010. I think that we can continue to support our police without the need for substantial rollout of tasers, but I also think it is a matter for the Assembly.
I am very interested—again, Minister Corbell highlighted this, and I had picked it up myself on reflecting on the 2010 discussion—that in 2010 Mr Hanson made a number of remarks about the fact that I essentially should not have brought the issue to the Assembly. He made this observation:
The Greens’ motion essentially also calls on the decision to be made by the Assembly rather than by the minister and the police. That requirement has been waived in the government’s amendment and we support that. It is important to note where that decision should be made.
A couple of paragraphs later he went on to say:
But I do not think it is appropriate that the Assembly should be making such decisions. It would be unusual.
Yet here we are today with Mr Hanson exactly seeking to propagate a similar sort of argument to the one I used in 2010, to come in here and have a policy discussion—
Mr Hanson interjecting—
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video