Page 3255 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 23 August 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I note that point, Mr Assistant Speaker. In the annual report the DPP said funding had decreased through efficiency dividends. In question time last week, the Chief Minister denied that ere were any efficiency dividends. But I will get back to that point. The DPP continued:
The government has responded by increasing the number of beds at the prison, by appointing a fifth … judge in the ACT Supreme Court, and by increasing the resources available to police. However our pleas for increased resources have gone unanswered.
During estimates hearings the DPP, Mr Jon White, advised that the current funding—and I quote:
… goes nowhere near meeting the needs of the office. It is in the context of continuing efficiency measures …
One of the most concerning submissions we heard during estimates, and an important part of this motion, is the admission from the DPP that the lack of funding means that compromises would have to be made. I quote again:
There is an aspect of selection of cases; there is an aspect of compromise to the level of preparation of cases.
… the degree of expertise which is brought to particular cases.
If an appropriate level of resourcing is not given to my office, the standard of prosecutions will suffer.
… as presently resourced we will not be able to fully meet the capacity.
I note that there were in camera hearings. That is unprecedented. Certainly, in my time in the Assembly, it was the first time that estimates hearings have been taken in camera. I was not privy to those, but it certainly speaks to the severity of the case and some of the impacts that the DPP has highlighted that prosecutions will suffer.
It is not just about the number of prosecutions; it is about the standard of those prosecutions, and the number of caseloads that simply will not be met. That should not be forced onto the people of Canberra. The DPP are doing their best but they do not have enough money.
Ms Le Couteur is walking out of the chamber. It is my understanding that she was on that committee, and she would have taken part in writing this report. Correct me if I am wrong, but this is a tripartisan report. She is nodding, on her way out. I look forward to her support, because my motion simply says what is in the committee report, a tripartisan committee report. This is not some sort of Liberal agenda here. This report was written and agreed to by Liberal, Labor and Greens members. I look forward to tripartisan support for what is already in a tripartisan committee report. The report states:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video