Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 4 Hansard (11 April) . . Page.. 1004..
MS DUNDAS: And I noted that he refused to express an opinion.
MR CORBELL: I am quite happy to answer the supplementary. The point I was making, Ms Dundas, is that it is not in order for you to ask a minister for an expression of opinion. That is not to say I do not have one; I do have one. I am quite happy to provide further information to Ms Dundas on the current status of the provision of condoms in secondary schools and colleges. I need to get advice on what the current policy is in that regard, and I will get that information to you as soon as possible.
I have to stress that this government's approach is strictly one of harm minimisation. We do not take the prohibition view entirely. We do not accept that prohibition is the only way of addressing this issue. Harm minimisation is the key priority for this government across all those areas.
Ms Dundas: So does the government support condoms in schools?
Mr Stanhope: Some colleges are removing vending machines because nobody is using them, Ms Dundas.
MR CORBELL: So the answer-
Mr Cornwell: On a point of order: who is answering the question? I thought it was directed to Mr Corbell, and the Chief Minister is interjecting.
MR SPEAKER: Mr Corbell.
MR CORBELL: Mr Speaker, harm minimisation across all areas of the health field, including sexual health, is extremely important. It is an issue the government treats very seriously. This government went to the election with a clear and explicit policy on drugs and other areas of health, one which emphasised a harm minimisation approach. That is certainly the philosophy that continues. In relation to the specific issue of condom vending machines in schools, I am happy to provide that information to Ms Dundas, once I have it.
MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, my question is to Mr Stanhope as Attorney-General. On 14 January this year on ABC radio you said in respect of the Gallop report:
I have a very strong desire to table the report ...
You made similar comments on radio 2CC and in the Canberra Times. However, in the judgment delivered yesterday by His Honour Mr Justice Crispin in the litigation which has sprung up over this, the following passage appears:
Mr Walker, who appeared for the Attorney-General, supported Mr Howe's submissions. He also stressed the fact that there was no evidence that, at the time he made copies available to the plaintiffs, the Chief Minister had formed any intention to table the report. He informed me that since notice of the Speaker's submissions had been received only late on the afternoon of 9 April 2002, time had not permitted