• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

QUESTIONS WITHOur NOTICE Wednesday, 20 March 1991 ASSEMBLY 431 Wednesday, 20 March 1991 The SPEAKER (Hon. Ken Coghill) took the chair at 10.34 a.m. and read the prayer. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE MINISTERIAL RESPONSIBILITY Mr BROWN (Leader of the Opposition) - Does the Premier accept that it is a fundamental principle of the Westminster system that Ministers must accept responsibility for their actions and also for their departmental officers? Ms KIRNER (Premier) - This is a matter that has often been broadly discussed in this place. In my view Ministers take responsibility for their portfolios. Ministers are not always able to know everything that departmental officers do, but I believe if there is any difficulty with departmental officers two issues arise: the first is the principle of accountability to the community; the second concerns loyalty to officers which means Ministers owe them careful investigation of the circumstances but, where there is need for action, they act. I hope the Leader of the Opposition also has the same views for his own staff that I have just expressed. Mr McNAMARA (Leader of the National Party) - Will the Premier give the House an undertaking that she will dismiss any Minister involved in unlawful expenditure without Parliamentary authority and who refuses to resign? Ms KIRNER (Premier) - To fling that kind of issue around the House as though there may be something behind it is a very serious way to use this House. It is a hypothetical question. If there is a matter which members of this opposition want to put on the table let them put it on the table and we will deal with it. AMECON FRIGATE PROJECT Mr FORDHAM (Footscray) - I also ask a question of the Premier. Will the Premier inform the House of the progress of the implementation of the AMECON frigate project and of the benefits that this ongoing project is providing for Victoria's economic and industrial development? QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 432 ASSEMBLY Wednesday, 20 March 1991 Ms KIRNER (Premier) - AMECON is one of the success stories of manufacturing industry in Victoria. From being a company that, when it was the Naval Dockyards, was in total disarray with a legion of stories about how bad and unproductive it was, AMECON is now a prize example across Australia and indeed the world of how a small country can have a first-class centre of excellence in shipbuilding. That was not easily done. It required careful targets, careful planning and cooperation. That was assisted, of course, by AMECON winning, because of the quality of its bid, the contract for the frigates. I am very pleased to say that not only is the frigate contract timetable being met on time, but at the moment it is being met ahead of time. Not only is it being met ahead of time and therefore increasing employment in the western suburbs but, through the contracts to other suppliers throughout Victoria, it is also increasing investment in Victoria and job opportunities through that contract of $1.25 billion. It is expected that Victorian companies, including AMECON, will eventually be awarded work worth $1.4 billion to $1.65 billion. That is, more than $1 billion is being generated to other industries by AMECON successfully winning the frigate contract. The contracts awarded to Victorian companies from the larger contract are expected to be worth $200 million to $230 million in hull structure; from $50 million to $70 million in propulsion plants, and $120 million in electronic plants. Cities like Ballarat are benefiting by up to $25 million. At the moment central Victoria, including Bendigo, is benefiting by up to $190 million. Inner Melbourne is benefiting by up to $140 million. During the peak construction period 3000 jobs will be generated at AMECON between 1993 and the year 2000. One hundred and seventy new jobs will be created this financial year alone, which, of course, goes against the trend in the manufacturing industry. This would not have been possible if the kind of industrial policy that this government has was not put in place at AMECON. It was not a policy of division, the division of the opposition; it was a policy of setting a clear target, getting the industry and the union to work together on reducing the number of unions from twelve to four, which was no mean feat and in which both industry and unions played a leadership role and then, of course, the government picked up its real responsibility in this area and injected $7.2 million into the innovative Marine Engineering Training and Research Centre that I will have the pleasure of opening in Williamstown on Friday. As well as that, the capacity for further injection of knowledge into all manufacturing industry has been generated by agreements on technology transfer with German companies. We also now have the agreement of Mr John White, the first-class Managing Director of AMECON, to join the government's Manufacturing Industry Council. That is the kind of policy, and that is the kind of implementation that our government has in contrast to the opposition, which still does not have an industry policy, but has the hide to be critical of those who have. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Wednesday, 20 March 1991 ASSEMBLY 433 BAN ON POLITICAL ADVERTISING Mr STOCKDALE (Brighton) - J direct my question to the Premier and I ask: what action has the government taken to support the Federal government's proposed ban on political advertising, or will the government join with the opposition in defending the right of freedom of speech? Ms KIRNER (Premier) - Isn't it fascinating? The honourable member for Brighton is suddenly the defender of freedom of speech in Victoria - the very same person who used this House to attack Mr Bill Gurry, a respected financial person in this State, and who did not have the courage to repeat it outside the House! It would seem the honourable member is now the subject of appropriate action in that regard. What a farce! Mr Brown interjected. Ms KIRNER - The Leader of the Opposition says that I have already made a judgment on the case. I have made no judgment. I do not judge people or use this House to make statements which judge people. The honourable member for Brighton is clearly upset about this matter, and well he might be. The opposition has never had the slightest interest in freedom of speech being properly used either in Parliament or outside. The position taken by the Federal government is reasonable. There is no guarantee of freedom of speech when those who can afford it are the ones who have big dollars to pay for it. COMMUNITY JUSTICE PANELS Mr SHELL (Geelong) - Will the Minister for Police and Emergency Services explain to the House the progress of the steps he is taking to introduce community justice panels? Mr SANDON (Minister for Police and Emergency Services) - I thank the honourable member for his question and his interest in this important area. My department has been engaged with the Aboriginal community and the Victorian Aboriginal Legal Service Cooperative Ltd in introducing a unique program to keep Aboriginal people out of prison and therefore out of the dangers that accompany Aboriginal imprisonment. In many ways the often simple solutions or the old-time remedies are the best. We have gone back to the system used by Aboriginal people in the past. It is a return to the days when the community in general and the elders in particular took responsibility for Aboriginal people and the problems of individual members. The concept of Aboriginal community justice panels was put forward by the Aboriginal community and the legal service during discussions on the Royal Commission into Aboriginal deaths in custody. The government has endorsed the project as it was then formulated as a way of addressing the problems highlighted by the Royal Commission in an effort to reduce the levels of imprisonment of Aboriginal people. In the past few days I have announced that we are moving away from funding the Aboriginal legal service to providing direct funding to community panels. We believe that is an important extension of a significant program. Elsewhere I have mentioned my 77597/91-1S QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 434 ASSEMBLY Wednesday. 20 March 1991 support for diversion programs. I believe this is a significant crime prevention program and it will be significant in reducing deaths in custody. I suspect other States will also take it up. Community justice panels rely on volunteers who are willing to work with the community and members of the criminal justice system, especially the judiciary and the police. They will ensure the welfare of their community members is paramount. When a Koori is brought into a police station, members of the local panel will be called in and will take the offender either home or to a sobering up centre; in other words, they will take responsibility for that Aboriginal person. In addition panels will also assist with providing advice to the judiciary - an important aspect of the program. Some positive aspects have already been covered such as the refurbishment of the Echuca courthouse which has been turned into a major tourist attraction and a Koori cultural centre. I believe there is bipartisan support for this program because of its importance although we had great difficulty finding out who was the opposition spokesperson. It turns out to be the honourable member for Forest Hill who, I am pleased to say, has come into the House. If he is not aware of this important initiative, I should be more than happy to provide a briefing because it is significant that to date the opposition has had no policies on Aboriginal people.

Load more

  178

Copy Link