Page 3293 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 23 August 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Recommendation 70 of the report is that the government establish accountability targets for prevention and early intervention measures relating to family and personal violence, and the government agrees to that in part. Recommendation 71 is to provide detailed breakdowns of expenditures in the safer families package, and the government agrees in principle. So we know money is going into this area and we know cuts are being applied. The estimates committee is trying to find out where the money is going in terms of a detailed breakdown of expenditures, and it looks like the government is not going to provide that. It is very difficult for this Assembly to determine whether those measures are going to be effective if the government will not provide a response as to where that money is going. We support money going to these important areas, but we have a responsibility to assess whether that money is being applied effectively. I note when this initiative first came up the bulk of the money was being put into more bureaucrats as opposed to frontline services.
Turning to the DPP—this was the subject of my motion this afternoon, which was disappointingly watered down—I will not re-read all of the quotes from the DPP. They are disturbing, though, and I will read a couple of highlights from the DPP.
… as presently resourced we will not be able to fully meet the capacity.
And further that “the DPP must make compromises including selection of cases as well as compromises to the level of preparation and degree of expertise brought to cases.” Further:
If an appropriate level of resourcing is not given to my office, the standard of prosecutions will suffer.
The estimates report came up with some pretty good recommendations in this area. I was there for the evidence that was provided by the DPP. I was not there for the in camera evidence so I am not sure what was said, but I assume it was an extrapolation of those comments and providing further detail. The estimates committee came up with a number of well-considered, unanimous recommendations which have been largely ignored by the government; they have just been “noted.” (Second speaking period taken.)
It is bizarre in the extreme that, with the recommendations provided by Ms Le Couteur and by two Labor members, when I presented them to the Assembly, they were described by Mr Rattenbury as “Mr Hanson’s measures, Mr Hanson’s approach”, and Ms Le Couteur voted against her own recommendations. It is a strange old world we live in, isn’t it, when Ms Le Couteur, in committee and out there in the public, will be saying one thing, and then will come into this place and vote against her own recommendations.
It is disappointing in the extreme, and I think that is one of the reasons why members of the community say they have had enough. They hear enough from Ms Le Couteur about how she is going to stand up for this or stand up for that—strong words.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video