Page 213 - Week 01 - Thursday, 18 February 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The approach that we have had from Mr Kaine to this report reflects more than anything, firstly, that he either cannot or did not read the report, but we have put a picture in for him so that he can understand it. Secondly, for some odd reason he has decided to make some political mileage. I would like to comment a little on the political mileage, because his initial attempt said, "Michael Moore went out there and decided that what he wanted to do was establish his name out in Tuggeranong and he came up with no solutions".
Mr Kaine, I understand the Hare-Clark system a little better than that. There is absolutely no advantage whatsoever in my establishing my name out in Tuggeranong. It makes absolutely no difference to me, as far as re-election prospects go - not the slightest little bit. It is very different from Mr Kaine, who I presume is listening in his office upstairs. Since he cannot read he might as well try to listen, although there have been some indications that he cannot listen either. What is clear is that a little better understanding of the Hare-Clark system would help Mr Kaine as well, although there have been some indications that he is getting a general concept of what it is about because he did move out to Tuggeranong. The most cynical of observers would be likely to say that perhaps he had a political motive in doing that. I would not say that, Madam Speaker, but I can imagine that some cynical observers might well do so.
On that little note I would like to take this opportunity to thank the other members of the committee: Ms Ellis, who is not here with us now, but may pick this up in Hansard; and Mr Westende for his approach. I point out to the Assembly that it is an unanimous report of the committee. I would particularly like to thank the secretary, Mr Bill Symington, for his very good work in supporting the committee and in assisting us with research.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
DRUGS OF DEPENDENCE (AMENDMENT) BILL (NO. 4) 1992
Debate resumed from 17 December 1992, on motion by Mr Berry:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
MRS CARNELL (11.31): Madam Speaker, this Bill seeks to make workable section 194 of the Drugs of Dependence Act 1989. This section allowed for the destruction of a drug of dependence by the Government Analyst under certain circumstances. Unfortunately, section 194 was regarded as unworkable by the Director of Public Prosecutions and as a result no applications for destruction have been placed. These amendments to the Drugs of Dependence Act are based upon similar provisions in New South Wales law, provisions that I understand are working quite well.
The amendments provide for a detailed and hopefully workable procedure for the destruction of excess quantities of cannabis seized under the Act, and set out procedures by which appropriate analyst's certificates are obtained and kept for subsequent evidentiary purposes. Obviously, to protect both the police and the accused, it will be essential that these procedures are followed exactly. The Liberal Party supports this Bill, but recommends that a close check be kept on the workings to ensure that appropriate procedures are followed and that justice is both done and seen to be done. The Liberal Party supports this Bill.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .