Page 3205 - Week 07 - Thursday, 1 July 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I think there would rarely have been a more damning piece of evidence or testimony from a community group in an estimates process. And what we have seen since then have been attempts by the Greens and the Labor Party to sanitise that evidence, to overlook that evidence, then culminating in Mr Hargreaves effectively attacking the credibility of the carers, with no basis—no basis whatsoever.
When asked about the institutionalised abuse, the minister in her appearance before the committee said, “I refuted it.” When asked if she had spoken to Ms Le about her comments, she indicated she had not but her department had. So she hears a claim of institutionalised abuse against her department and she says, “Well, I got my department to talk to them and I am satisfied.” She did not bother to talk to them herself. She did not bother to do the work. We have seen, unfortunately, from this minister, firstly, a complete lack of capacity. We see it in question time. Mr Hargreaves comes in here and blusters about it, but the reality is that he knows it and so do his colleagues. She comes in here consistently in question time and simply does not go anywhere near answering questions, either because she does not want to or because she is simply incapable of it. Either way, we do not get answers. We do not get answers and so she treats this place with contempt.
It is reasonable for us to expect that a minister who has carriage of a portfolio that looks after vulnerable Canberrans would answer questions, direct questions, in this place. But she does not and she consistently does not. We have seen it this week. We have seen it over two days; she just reads the script, whether it is relevant or not. She takes the cues from Mr Barr, who tells her how to not answer her questions. You even see it from her when the Greens from time to time ask her a question; she reads the script and it has got nothing to do with the question. She just reads.
The inability to get things done is one thing. But what we see in terms of the kinship carers is a callousness towards them, which I think is repeated by Mr Hargreaves’s attitude and the Labor Party’s attitude towards the kinship carers, to try and tear down a significant Canberran, to try and tear down a significant community advocate, because on this occasion she does not agree with the Labor government; she is critical of the Labor government.
I am sure that in the past Ms Marion Le would have agreed with the Labor government on a lot of things, and disagreed, no doubt, with the Howard government and others. She would not be seen as somehow aligned in any way, shape or form with our side of politics as a general rule. She has called it as she has seen it—and what she gets is abuse. What she gets is a questioning of her credibility.
Before I go on, I did want to just make mention of the outstanding job that Mrs Dunne has done in taking up the cause of not just the kinship carers but issues around childcare. She has shown compassion that is lacking on the other side of politics. She has shown that she will fight for people who need to be fought for. No matter what blocking or abuse she cops from the other side, she will not be deterred. I think people can see that in Mrs Dunne and I commend her for it.
Ms Gallagher interjecting—
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video