Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 1 Hansard (14 February) . . Page.. 135..
MR MOORE: Indeed. The point I am making is that you had an opportunity to show that you are not secretive. We are very open. We are the most open government in Australia. We will remain that. But as open as we are, we are not going to publish the details of security problems in a centre designed to incarcerate people.
MR RUGENDYKE: My question is to the Treasurer, Mr Humphries. Minister, I understand that the ACT government provides annual funding from the budget or through the grant system specifically earmarked for Project Saul. Could you advise the Assembly how much money, if any, has been provided for Project Saul over the last five years by the ACT government?
MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, no, I cannot advise Mr Rugendyke about that. Project Saul is a very important project. It is one that the government is very happy to endorse and, I think, support financially. I will find out, Mr Rugendyke. I think it fits in very well with the agenda-an agenda that emphasises the building up of Social Capital, taking kids who are at risk, giving them the opportunity to be mentored or nurtured by the involvement of a number of people, particularly the police, and assisting them to find a path out of a possible behaviour of criminality. So I think that is a very appropriate kind of program. I will see to what extent the government actually backs that support with money.
MR RUGENDYKE: Thank you, Minister. I have seen the financial statements for Project Saul and there is no record of ACT government money being received on an annual basis. If it is the case that there is grant money going to Project Saul, could the minister ask the AFP what they have done with the money specifically earmarked for Project Saul and how it has been acquitted?
MR HUMPHRIES: Yes, I will find out, Mr Speaker.
MR WOOD: My question is to Mr Moore. Minister, I welcome the announcement of some additional funds for Disability Services, but isn't it too little, too late? Isn't it the case that your resistance to the inquiry now under way and the revelations from the coroner's inquiry make it clear you have been shamed into action?
MR MOORE: Mr Speaker, no.
MR WOOD: He certainly didn't want to debate it, did he? But I'm not surprised.
MR SPEAKER: It was very close to an expression of opinion.
Mr Moore: Mr Speaker, on a point of order: Mr Wood has just used a preamble.
MR SPEAKER: It came very close to being an expression of opinion. I suppose you are lucky you got an answer at all.
Mr Moore: How can you have a supplementary to "no"?