Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2006 Week 3 Hansard (29 March) . . Page.. 756..
DR FOSKEY (continuing):
The ACT government has an excellent road safety action plan. I mentioned a few flaws in it. I say that we need to be really committed. We cannot just say, "We have only had two casualties this year."I am sure that those two casualties are already too many. We need to be aware that constant vigilance is needed and that even the most vigilant drivers can be in an accident through none of their own causing-a mere slip, a mistake, by them or someone else. The whole business of driving around is a dangerous thing. Cautious driving, walking and cycling are obviously important. Thus, how can I vote against this motion?
Debate interrupted in accordance with standing order 74 and the resumption of the debate made an order of the day for a later hour.
Sitting suspended from 12.30 to 2.30 pm.
Questions without notice
Policing-use of CCTV
MR STEFANIAK: My question is to the minister for police. ACT Policing, in September 2005, identified for the Chief Minister's Department review into CCTV systems that no funding was provided for monitoring or usage of the CCTV system. ACT Policing also identified that CCTV system use steadily declined due to competing priorities within ACT Policing. Minister, why have you failed to resource ACT Policing sufficiently so that they can use the CCTV systems as required and ensure that community safety can be maintained?
MR HARGREAVES: Firstly, I reject the absurd notion from those opposite that we have not resourced the police in the ACT properly because, had we not resourced the police in the ACT properly, we would not have seen double-digit crime reduction in all the major crime activities; we would not have seen a greater police presence; we would not have seen statistics in major crime areas go down by double digits; we would not have seen police officers on the streets-
Mr Pratt: Vandalism, graffiti.
Mrs Dunne: Burglaries are worse.
MR SPEAKER: This serial passing of the ball to somebody else to interject will cease.
MR HARGREAVES: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. We would not have been able to see crime figures go downwards by double digits; we would not have seen more police in uniforms in our town centres, in Manuka and Kingston and in the suburbs; we would not have been able to see more police in motor vehicles out on the streets in Manuka; we would not have been able to see more marked police cars out on the streets; and we would not have been able to see, because of the activities of unmarked police cars, a considerable-
MR SPEAKER: Mr Hargreaves.