Page 2540 - Week 08 - Thursday, 30 August 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
have no information yet. The department still cannot break down certain pieces of information which I would have thought were basic. We have been assured again that that is at least now on track to occur. It is about time. I can recall the Chief Minister asking questions of me as attorney when he was shadow attorney. I asked questions of him which still have not been resolved.
The increase in funding for victims is welcome. However, it should be noted that it is funded by another tax: this time a levy on traffic infringement notices and court fines. That is probably a preferable tax than slugging the poor old innocent Canberra ratepayer who does not commit any offences, but it is still a tax. I think it would be a good thing if some of the funding went to VOCAL, an organisation that has continually provided invaluable support to victims. I commend that to the government.
The ACT Human Rights Commission is a combination of agencies that separately performed some valuable work but the jury is still out on whether combining them has been a good move. Unlike Dr Foskey, I cannot think of too much that the Human Rights Act has done which would advance the cause of ordinary Canberrans. At times it has been used to grant criminals bail in the Supreme Court on bail applications—often appealing against Magistrates Court decisions. It has certainly been used where there has been a bit of a glitch in the law: it seems that juvenile repeat offenders are treated completely differently and contrary to section 9B of the Bail Act than adult offenders. That is a worry because one of the recurring themes in terms of problems with the Human Rights Act in a civilised society like ours is that it has a disproportionate emphasis on the rights of the criminal over the rights of innocent law-abiding citizens.
The Human Rights Commission is a very convenient focus for the Chief Minister to go off sticking his bib into other people’s issues. He sought the commissioner’s views, for example, on the commonwealth’s indigenous package in the Northern Territory. I disagree with the views she expressed; I thought some were overtly political. In 2001 the Chief Minister, in “A code of good government”, said:
While Labor believes the ACT public service should provide leadership, it also strongly believes the ACT public service should concentrate its efforts on meeting the legitimate needs of government and the community in an efficient and accountable manner.
There is work to be done at home: there is no need to strut the national stage spruiking the need for reform and constant change.
They are his own words and he should live by them. How times have changed. Mr Deputy Speaker, you have already spoken on the emergency services portfolio, so I will make absolutely no mention of that.
I now turn to the coroner’s report. There is an interesting recommendation by Coroner Doogan recommending that the Attorney-General and the government, in consultation with the Chief Justice and the Chief Magistrate, take legislative action, which would have the effect of funds being directly appropriated annually to the courts, preferably along the lines of the commonwealth model as it applies to the High Court, the Federal Court, the Family Court and the Federal Magistrates Court. Alternatively, the funds could be appropriated in accordance with the South
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .