Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 7 Hansard (24 June) . . Page.. 1921 ..

MR BERRY (continuing):

It is not only the Chief Minister that the Assembly has to worry about in terms of security; it is her staff as well. Whilst the Chief Minister and the now Deputy Chief Minister might like to posture out there in the community about how these added security arrangements are unnecessary - they might be for them; they might not care about their own political hides - I would like to see a little more care taken for their staff. That was a very serious consideration which had to be addressed by the Assembly committee. There seems to be a philosophical barrier against caring about the safety interests of staff from that lot over there. It is not a barrier that prevents me from taking action, because the new arrangements are a proper and responsible reaction to the needs of working people in their place of work. This working place is no different from any other.

Mr Speaker, what we have seen in relation to this security matter is a political reaction to a practical problem. There was some political grandstanding by the Chief Minister and the now Deputy Chief Minister. What is most interesting about it is that the first complaints came from the Deputy Chief Minister's office. They were acted upon accordingly. I think the Government ought to keep its head down on this one because there is a fair bit of hypocrisy floating around. The Government were quick to cut the resources of the Assembly, and then they complained about the result of their cuts. When the Speaker and the committee, the Administration and Procedure Committee, acted to resolve difficulties with security, the Government complained again. This is a mob that you just cannot please. We were not that concerned about pleasing them politically; what we were concerned about, of course, was providing satisfactory security measures. They are much less stringent than might apply in a whole range of other places, including, I suggest, many ACT Public Service offices. The grizzling was quite unnecessary and was just political posturing.

Mrs Carnell: Mr Berry, is there a Public Service office in the ACT that you cannot walk into during the day?

MR BERRY: Try the one over there with finger scanning. The fact of the matter is that the Government has been caught out in relation to this; there is no question about that. They cut the Assembly's funds; they complained about security arrangements; and then they complained about the quite reasonable security arrangements that were put in place to protect not only them but also their staff. Minister Humphries's office was one of the first to complain. Other Government members complained about the security arrangements. They got a proper reaction, but we got a political whinge from the Chief Minister and her second-in-charge. I think they have been exposed for the hypocrisy of their stand in relation to the issue.

The other matter I want to talk about, Mr Speaker, is the politically inspired review of members' salary allocations.

Mrs Carnell: What has this to do with the budget? It is actually budget neutral.

MR BERRY: The Chief Minister says, "What has this to do with the budget?". It is about the supply of money to the Assembly for the payment of staff; that is what it has to do with the budget. You are struggling with this Treasury portfolio because you do not understand these quite simple things.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .