Page 684 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 5 July 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
protect the victims - and let us get it over and done with. Then, if the Government wants to, let us look at some of the longer-term issues which may be causing it and about which perhaps it is within the power of this Government to do something.
MR STEVENSON (11.43): Mr Speaker, I am sure all of us agree with the need to address the problem that this Bill seeks to address. It was brought home to me very recently, when my mother in Sydney said that she would not go to a nearby suburb, Bankstown, of a night-time. I have never known my mother, in all her life, to be afraid of going anywhere. If this is a situation towards which we are heading, in certain parts of Australia, it is certainly something that needs to be addressed. As an ex-policeman, of some eight years standing, I well understand the problem that the police face in our society if they do not have certain powers or, in addition, if the courts, in certain cases, do not back them up.
One of the problems you find as a policeman is that you want to do your job, and that is what the police in the ACT desire to do. They do not seek any powers for their own benefit; it is simply to do their job. Mr Collaery mentioned that there have possibly been cases where police have overstepped their rights under the law, in the desire to do their job, and I would certainly agree with that. We need to have sufficient laws to allow police to protect our society.
The Chief Minister has a motion on the notice paper today, and it may have been put there as a result of Mr Stefaniak's Bill. However, it does address matters that really need to be addressed. Under paragraph (2) it mentioned that the committee should consider all relevant methods by which such action could be taken, including, but not limited to, legal, social, economic, environmental design, deployment of the Australian Federal Police and the ACT public service personnel and the provision of services by government and/or private agencies.
Certainly, Mr Stefaniak's Bill is not designed to handle the root cause of the problem; it is designed to handle the manifestation of it. We need to address the reasons why these problems arise, and that should certainly be done. I would agree that the Standing Committee on Social Policy is the body to do it.
The Government mentioned, quite rightly, that there need to be safeguards for civil liberties. Mr Stefaniak has already shown, by the amendment about which he has informed us, that he is well prepared to look at making sure there are safeguards, and, indeed, with the amendment the Bill could not be used to prevent someone operating in a political or demonstrative manner.
It is a short time for the committee to arrive at its conclusion. I agree with Mr Wood that there have been
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .