Page 1803 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 5 May 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
There was no concern for the community because it had rejected the community. Indeed, there was an enormous amount of hypocrisy, particularly on the part of the minister—I guess you could call it a naked vote-buying attempt—whereas the policy we took was well founded.
The history of it, for those that do not recall it, was that on 7 October 2008 Mr Corbell announced the ALP’s policy of providing $0.3 million for suburban policing consultative committees. Do you remember those—suburban policing consultative committees? There is a Neighbourhood Watch network across the country and it is a really effective program. But no, it is not good enough for Simon Corbell. He wanted suburban policing consultative committees. Immediately after this announcement, the president of Neighbourhood Watch spoke on the radio of her extreme disappointment that Labor had acted in this way.
On the Ross Solly show on the ABC on 8 October before 9 am, Mr Corbell attempted to defend this decision. He said that these committees were different from the Neighbourhood Watch approach and that the government had always been in consultation with Neighbourhood Watch in any event—“as recently as yesterday”, meaning 7 October 2008.
Madam Deputy Speaker, just remember this, and get the timing right: before 9 o’clock, no money for Neighbourhood Watch. No, it was not going to happen. We were told that we have got our suburban policing consultative committees. But then, suddenly, on ABC radio at 11.30, Mr Corbell rang in. He was busy out there on the hustings, but he had time. Somewhere between 9 am when he got off the phone and 11.30 am when he got back on the phone to the radio station, Mr Corbell announced that, after further consultation, the ALP would suddenly provide Neighbourhood Watch with $20,000.
That is how you develop policy. At breakfast he said, “No, I will think about it at morning tea.” And there for lunch is $20,000 on the plate. Beautiful! It really is a sterling commentary on how the Stanhope Labor government develops policy and funds. In monetary terms, the quantum of funds for Neighbourhood Watch is minor. I think the perception of Labor with respect to Neighbourhood Watch was obviously hurting quite broadly across the community.
I remember the phone-in. Corbell sounded very, very weak. There he was trying to claw back the ground, trying to build some goodwill and recognising that Neighbourhood Watch was across the community. It was another significant Stanhope backflip moment—eager at breakfast, no money; drinking your cup of tea with a bit of sugar in it perhaps at morning tea—
Mr Hanson: He might have got a phone call.
MR SMYTH: He might have got a phone call and suddenly, there you are at 11.30 in the morning, with some money for Neighbourhood Watch. It is interesting. I am delighted that the motion is here. It truly shows that somebody like Steve Doszpot has got his roots right into the community. He is in touch with what people are saying; he knows what people want; that is a good thing. But there is a dividend for this. There is a community dividend for all of us. This is truly effective money to mobilise the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video