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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 4 Hansard (24 June) . . Page.. 976 ..

MR STANHOPE (continuing):

How do you know what is the nature of offences on streets and footpaths in Canberra when we do not have the data that reveals it? You are claiming that we are actually clamouring for this legislation and that the police desperately need it, when the police information does not reveal the extent of the problem. What is your basis for deciding that there is an amazing need for the police to have powers to control activities on streets and footpaths, when the basic data on which we can rely to determine the extent of the problem reveals that there is no problem? I must say that I am extremely surprised - - -

Mr Humphries: That is just not true. Why do you not table it?

MR STANHOPE: I will do that. I will be happy to table it. All I am saying is that I tried to find the data on streets and footpaths and it appears not to exist.

Mr Humphries: I will go and get it.

MR STANHOPE: I think you should. (Extension of time granted) I am concerned, Mr Speaker, that this very serious matter perhaps has not received the treatment it deserves from me in my rebuttal of the arguments advanced by those on the other side, because I allowed myself to be distracted - a characteristic which I will have to overcome.

I regret that Mr Osborne got under my skin and I allowed myself to be distracted from actually mounting what I believe to be objective arguments against this legislation. I find it regrettable that he feels the need to challenge any suggestion that perhaps we really do need to look at the powers that we give to our police and that any suggestion by anybody that we need to be careful not to provide untrammelled and arbitrary powers to the police is automatically to be assumed to be an assault on the integrity and reputation of our police force. That, I think, is just nonsense and does not allow us, as a parliament, to address issues on their merits. Those are simply not my feelings about police. I do not feel that in a debate such as this I should be required to respond to fierce interjections about whether I respect the job that the police do in this city. It is simply, it seems to me, a totally unnecessary attack on me and anybody else who wishes to mount a sustained and objective argument against the principles of this sort of legislation, why it is not good legislation, and why it does not enhance the enforcement of the law in the ACT in any way.

Debate interrupted.

Motion (by Ms Tucker) agreed to, with the concurrence of an absolute majority:

That standing order 76 be suspended for the remainder of this sitting.

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