1. Home
  2. Hansard & Papers
  3. Legislative Council
  4. 28 August 2002
Contact Print this page Reduce font size Increase font size

General Purpose Standing Committee No. 3

Printing Tips | Print selected text | Full Day Hansard Transcript         « Prior Item | Item 14 of 50 | Next Item »

About this Item
Speakers - Pearce The Hon Greg
Business - Committee, Report


    GENERAL PURPOSE STANDING COMMITTEE NO. 3
Page: 4283


    Report: Inquiry into Cabramatta Policing

    The Hon. GREG PEARCE [11.47 a.m.]: I move:
        That this House take note of Report No. 8 of General Purpose Standing Committee No. 3 entitled "Report on Inquiry into Cabramatta Policing", dated July 2001.

    This significant inquiry of a general purpose standing committee of this House has received a great deal of attention in the public arena, not only because of the important issues which arose during the inquiry but also because the inquiry revealed endemic failures of the Government to attend to significant community concerns. The inquiry was not about drug policy; it was related to policing and the resources made available to deal with specific problems that occurred in Cabramatta, problems that are occurring all over the State. The report disclosed Government inaction and media spin in relation to crime, particularly drug-related crime, across New South Wales and absolutely failed policing policies and strategies that had been implemented under the former Minister for Police and the former Commissioner of Police.

    I will not quote at length from the report because it is available for all to read. Suffice it to say that the conditions the committee found in Cabramatta were horrifying and distressing and of great concern to members of the committee. They raised a significant issue regarding the accountability of the Government, particularly the Minister for Police, for the inaction that had led to many of the community concerns and problems in Cabramatta.

    The role of a committee in scrutinising the actions or inactions of government is fundamental to our system of government. I certainly found it a beneficial experience to take part in a committee that worked in the way this committee did. Whilst we had some disputes along the way, I compliment the various members and the chair of the committee on the way the committee moved forward and made sure we gave the community and all interested parties a proper opportunity to put their views, and ultimately to allow us to uncover the truth as to what was happening in Cabramatta.

    I also wish to pay tribute to some of the witnesses who appeared before the committee. Councillor Thang Ngo was instrumental in bringing to the attention of the committee the conditions he observed in Cabramatta as the only Vietnamese-speaking councillor on Fairfield City Council. I particularly refer to paragraphs 3.56 and 3.57 in relation to some of his comments, which the committee found very useful. There had been a crime explosion in Cabramatta. Chapter 3 of the report outlines in some detail the circumstances of that explosion in crime: the drug houses, the gang wars and the crisis that Cabramatta found itself in. Over a number of years the media undertook its own investigations into what was happening in Cabramatta, because it was apparent to anyone who cared to have a look at the situation that there was a problem and that it was being either ignored or hidden. One of the surprising things the committee found during the inquiry was that there was an attitude in Cabramatta, which I believe emanated from Commissioner Ryan—

    The Hon. Rick Colless: Former Commissioner Ryan.

    The Hon. GREG PEARCE: —former Commissioner Ryan.

    The Hon. John Jobling: Deposed Commissioner Ryan.

    The Hon. GREG PEARCE: —driven-out former Commissioner Ryan, that street drug crime was essentially ignored in Cabramatta.

    The Hon. John Jobling: There was nothing in the five indicators to record the drug crime.

    The Hon. GREG PEARCE: I will come to that in a moment. That led to an outbreak of house break-ins and minor crime in Cabramatta, which was also ignored. I was astonished to hear the evidence that people believed there was effectively a containment policy in Cabramatta, an unspoken policy that drug supply and usage should be contained in the central business district of Cabramatta and that if it was left there other areas of the State may not be subjected to the same levels of crime and drug usage. I draw members' attention to paragraphs 3.8, 5.19, 5.20 and 10.11 of the report, which outline those concerns about the perception that there was a containment policy and about the supply of drugs.

    There were some seminal moments during the conduct of the inquiry. One of my colleagues has already made reference to the famous comment of deposed Commissioner Ryan that, according to his crime index, Roseville was safer than Cabramatta. I will return to that in a moment. One of the major events during the inquiry was the evidence given by Detective Sergeant Tim Priest on his second appearance before the committee. I will not take up a great deal of the time of the House on that matter because the circumstances of it are well known. However, the co-ordinated attack that then took place to discredit Tim Priest was astonishing.

    It became apparent, as is evident in the committee's report, that in essence what Tim Priest alleged about the Cook report and the failure to act on it, the gang warfare and the crime that took place, but, more importantly, about the failure of the police service, particularly Crime Agencies, to proactively deal with the gangs and the significant crime, was essentially correct. Tim Priest deserves to be commended for having the courage to bring to the attention of the public those major concerns. Another four police bravely came forward and essentially supported the revelations in relation to the lack of capacity at senior police levels to deal with the gangs, the drug supply and the other major crime that was apparent.

    I wish to focus on one of the perpetrators of the attack on Tim Priest's integrity and the attack on the other police. As the House knows, the attack on Tim Priest was both premeditated and quite vicious. One element of it was the appearance before the committee a couple of days after Tim Priest of Assistant Commissioner Clive Small. His evidence, which has been of concern to a number of committee members, was that the Cook report was acted upon, that 11 strike forces were supposedly proactively dealing with drug crime or gangs and major crime in Cabramatta, and that the response to the Cook report, which Tim Priest referred to, was a strike force called Portville which was established in February 2001. The importance of that was that if what Clive Small told us was true, Tim Priest's claims were not accurate and that there had been a proper and adequate response.

    The committee was able to review the terms of reference of the Cook report and also of the 11 strike forces referred to by Clive Small. It also had the opportunity to review the terms of reference for Strike Force Portville. Suffice it to say that on reviewing those documents and reviewing Mr Small's evidence, it is apparent that Mr Small's response was not accurate. I draw the attention of the House to a number of paragraphs of the report that deal with each of those essential matters raised by Assistant Commissioner Small. In paragraph 4.48 of the report the committee concluded that other than the telephone phone-ins—two of the strike forces that were supposed to be working were telephone phone-ins—only one of the strike forces nominated by Mr Small was directed to act in a proactive way in relation to drug-related crime. Strike Force Pitten was established in October 1999. At paragraph 4.58 the committee concluded:
        The Committee finds that the content of the Cook report was such as should have received urgent priority and critical attention. The Committee further finds that the failure to take any action until at least 1 February 2000, ten weeks after production of the assessment, was an inadequate response.

    However, most important was the episode in relation to Strike Force Portville. When Mr Small appeared before the committee he produced a document that he claimed was the terms of reference for Strike Force Portville, which was designed to support his submission and argument before the committee. The document turned out to be a combination of two separate terms of reference for Portville.

    Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted.



Last modified 05/12/2007 16:39:29   :   Update this page