Page 2375 - Week 06 - Thursday, 23 June 2011

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


Staff morale has improved significantly

Sick leave has reduced

Sick leave management strategies are in place

Regular staff meetings are conducted

Additional staff training programs have been implemented

Drug trafficking into the centre reduced (supported by intelligence) and

Detainee management strategies have been enhanced.

And this is the bloke that they want to get rid of. I think what is disgraceful and what is low is the position of both the Labor Party and the Greens on this where they are looking to sweep it under the carpet.

I will deal with Ms Bresnan’s amendment. There is a pattern of behaviour here from the Greens. They are all into transparency except if it is to do with their coalition partners or themselves. When it is about their dealings, when it is about the dealings of the government, it is “Let’s do it behind closed doors; let’s not have any sort of public process here.” We saw that with the disgraceful covering up of the bullying allegations in Canberra Hospital. Here we have it again. When there is an issue of concern, instead of actually having an inquiry that can get to the bottom of it, it is “Let’s do it quietly and secretly.”

When it came to issues at Bimberi, when we wanted to have a full and public inquiry, “No, let’s appoint a handpicked person to do it quietly.” And here we have an amendment by Ms Bresnan which is effectively telling Mr Hamburger to shut up. It is telling him, whether he likes it or not, “Well, what would be better for you?” So he has come out publicly and said, “I don’t believe I’ve been treated fairly.” He said, “I’ve been pushed when I shouldn’t have been pushed.” He has been prepared, courageously, to express those concerns publicly.

The Greens are saying to him: “No, you don’t know what’s good for you. What’s good for you is to do it quietly. You can quietly express your concerns through the Public Interest Disclosure Act.”

What a disgraceful suggestion—that we should be telling someone who has shown the courage to come out publicly and criticise how things have occurred that he should shut up; that we should tell him what we need is a secret process, a secret inquiry. This is the pattern of behaviour from the Labor Party and the Greens. Every time there is a difficult issue, “Let’s look to sweep it under the carpet. Let’s not have any sort of scrutiny on it; let’s sweep it under the carpet. Let’s do it behind closed doors. Let’s do it in secret.”

We saw it in the hospital. We saw it with bullying; now we are seeing it again and the Greens are leading the charge in this amendment, which would suggest to Mr Buchanan that what he should be doing is shutting up.

The government has questions to answer on this process. We do not know the answers to those questions. I was not in the room. What we do know is that a senior public servant who has served his community for over 30 years in the field of corrections, who was praised by the government’s own report as having helped to turn a


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