BLUE MOUNTAINS CITY COUNCIL BOMBING
I direct my question without notice to the Minister for Police and Minister for Emergency Services. Did Councillor Pascoe report death threats on 16 May 1990, 10 September 1990 and 14 October 1991 to the Katoomba police? Did he hand over tapes of the death threats? In view of this, why did police fail to take a statement from Councillor Pascoe and launch an investigation?
Order! I call the Minister for Multicultural and Ethnic Affairs to order for the second time.
I believe this needs to be put in perspective so that members of the Opposition cease to behave in the improper manner in which they are behaving under the leadership of Carr's chaos. Let us get the facts straight. The honourable member for Liverpool is suggesting that the police have not acted properly, have not investigated properly and are not pursuing this correctly. I would like to read the terms of reference in this regard and hope that while the investigation is being carried out members on the opposite side can act with a little decorum and a little propriety. The terms of reference state:
You are hereby directed to examine all aspects of the allegations made in State Parliament on Tuesday, 12 April, 1994, that were directed towards the Member for Blue Mountains . . .
Investigate all questions asked in The House by the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Bob Carr MP, Mr Whelan MP and Mr Anderson MP -
Order! I call the honourable member for Coogee to order for the second time.
On a point of order: the answer must be relevant to the question asked. The honourable member for Liverpool asked why reports of death threats in May 1990, September 1990 and October 1991 have not been acted upon. The question does not relate to any proposal by the Minister in recent days to send a note to the Commissioner of Police. It relates to the death threats on Alderman Pascoe on 16 May 1990, 10 September 1990 and 14 October 1991 and why the police have failed to take a statement from Councillor Pascoe.
Order! The Chair is well aware of the questions that were asked. It is correct that answers should be generally relevant to questions. There can be no doubt that the comments of the Minister are relevant to the subject-matter which was the basis of the question. Whether the facts given in an answer satisfy the question is a matter which has been debated in this Chamber as long as I have occupied the chair. The Minister for Police is certainly within the bounds of relevance. He may answer the question as he sees fit.
If the honourable member for Ashfield had listened, he would have understood that I did not send anything to the commissioner. He has alluded to a letter to the commissioner. I did not say I sent a letter to the commissioner. If he listens to the answer, he may learn something.
Order! I call the honourable member for Ashfield to order for the second time.
The document stated, "Investigate all questions asked in The House by the" -
On a point of order: the Minister is quoting from a document. He should at least give the date of the document and the status of the document.
Order! I call the honourable member for Wakehurst to order. I call the honourable member for Barwon to order for the second time. The Minister for Police will identify the document.
"Investigate all allegations made in The House by the Leader of the Opposition" -
On a point of order: Mr Speaker, on the previous point of order you ruled and instructed the Minister to identify the document. He has totally ignored your ruling.
Order! I have instructed the Minister for Police to identify the document. He had not proceeded far enough for me to know whether he was flouting my ruling or not. I draw his attention to my instruction to identify the document.
I apologise, Mr Speaker. With the noise from the rabble opposite, I did not hear your instruction. The document is a New South Wales Police Service document signed by the State Commander, Senior Assistant Commissioner Bruce Gibson, to Detective Inspector N. Hill, Major Crime Squad, North West, dated 14 April 1994.
Let us get the facts straight. The honourable member for Liverpool asked a question in regard to the bombing. This document will answer that question, if members opposite have the sense to listen. The honourable member raised the allegations on 12 April. Rapid action has been taken in regard to it. The document states:
Take all appropriate action deemed necessary from your investigation of the above two points.
Review the quality of the original investigation carried out into all matters reported to the police on this subject.
That is relevant to what the honourable member for Liverpool has raised. The document continues:
Make appropriate recommendations (disciplinary and/or procedural) on the above point.
You are to report on the progress of your investigation to this Command by way of daily status reports . . .
Order! I call the honourable member for Heffron to order for the second time.
I make it clear again that it does not matter which side of the House is affected; if allegations are made, they will be properly investigated and properly evaluated by the New South Wales Police Service.