Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 1 Hansard (29 April) . . Page.. 201 ..
Motion (by Mr Humphries) proposed:
That the Assembly do now adjourn.
MR BERRY (6.05): In the adjournment debate I refer to a document that has been handed to me. It is probably a forgery because it talks about the Liberal criteria for privatisation. On one side it says, "Please turn over"; on the other side it says, "Please turn over"; on the other side it says, "Please turn over"; and on the other side it says, "Please turn over"! I am sure it is a forgery because I know that no such document exists.
Mr Speaker, on a more serious matter: I have been approached by a constituent from Hall in relation to the provision of buses in that suburb. Hall, of course, is a fairly special place for the residents that live there and for those who visit. In recent times there has been the construction of some aged persons units in Hall which are a significant addition to that particular community and make it a more whole community, as most people would agree. However, the addition of the aged persons units adds another dimension to society, in that more people who do not have access to transport will be located in Hall.
The particular constituent who approached me was concerned that, although she is a ratepayer, an aged person and one who has made her contribution to society, she is unable to get proper access to bus transport to get her around the city. I put it to the Government that they should give some special consideration to the aged residents, and indeed other residents - the disabled and the young as well - who do not have access to motor vehicles and transport of their own. I think the situation in Hall is worthy of looking at, particularly in the light of this constituent's complaint. One could not help but support the establishment of the aged persons units because it ensures that Hall residents have some options about staying in the suburb; but at the same time I think we, as an Assembly, have to give some consideration to the provision of public transport to aged people and others who might want it in that suburb. Notwithstanding the size of it and the efficiencies of it, it is a matter of social justice that ought to be dealt with.
One other matter which I would like to raise relates to privacy. I have been approached by a constituent - and I understand that this complaint has been through the various official organs, such as the Privacy Commission, the Ombudsman and those sorts of people - who complains that he has not been able to sort out a privacy issue which concerns him. It boils down to the fact that no sooner do members of his family or close associates move than an organisation is able to find out where they are and immediately approach them at their new residence. You would say, "How would they do that?". I understand that the person has a private telephone number - a silent number - and takes a great deal of care about privacy issues. The only thing that comes to my mind is the use of the electoral roll, but there is no way of proving that somebody has been able to get access to that. Of course, on the electoral roll you can have a silent listing as well.