Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Current HansardDownload Current Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Wednesday, 16 June 2010
Page: 5687

Mr WOOD (7:13 PM) —My first question is probably best suited to the minister. It is in regard to a newspaper article appearing in the Knox Journal on 27 February 2008 on page 13. This is an issue regarding my electorate of La Trobe. It says:

For a moment last week the office of Home Affairs Minister Bob Debus—

I note it is the current minister’s predecessor—

promised the Federal Government would contribute $150,000 for crime cameras in Boronia.

But confusion ensued on Monday when Mr Debus’ office said the promise was actually for closed-circuit television system in Berwick—

which is also in my electorate. So my question to the minister is: will Boronia or Berwick be getting closed-circuit TV cameras? I will go on to further questions, though.

Mr Brendan O’Connor —I have got a couple of other questions, too, Jason, to deal with. We have got a number of other matters on notice that you want me to answer.

Mr Keenan —You have had an opportunity to deal with those. You answered one and sat down.

Mr Brendan O’Connor —Okay, do what you like.

Mr WOOD —I believe I have the call.

Mr Keenan interjecting

Mr Brendan O’Connor interjecting

The DEPUTY SPEAKER —Order! The member for La Trobe has the call. If the member for Stirling would like to have a further opportunity there are opportunities after other questions have been asked where he can have another five minutes.

Mr WOOD —I am happy to table that newspaper article too, Minister, if you want to have a look at that. The second question is regarding the Safer Suburbs Plan. Every single grant has gone to either a Labor electorate or a marginal Liberal electorate. The safest Liberal electorate to receive funding was Cowan, with a 1.7 per cent margin. The following four Liberal seats received funding: Bowman received $500,000, with a margin of 64 votes; Swan received $1.4 million, with a margin of 0.1 per cent; Stirling received $1.6 million, with a margin of 1.3 per cent; and Cowan received $2 million, with a margin of 1.7 per cent.

The following 12 Labor seats received funding: Robertson received $680,000, with 0.1 per cent margin; Solomon received $2.25 million, with 0.3 per cent margin; Hasluck received $1 million, with a 1.3 per cent margin; Longman received $1 million, with a 3.6 per cent margin; Franklin received $495,000, with a 4.5 per cent margin; Wakefield received $2.725 million, with a 6.6 per cent margin; Lindsay received $300,000, with a 6.8 per cent margin; Macquarie received $70,000, with a seven per cent margin; Makin received $75,000, with a 7.7 per cent margin; Corio received $300,000, with an 8.9 per cent margin; Richmond received $200,000, with an 8.9 per cent margin; and Lingiari received $300,000, with an 11.2 per cent margin.

I just want to know what the actual selection process is, apart from favouring Labor or marginal Liberal seats. Is there a selection process? How has it worked out that the Labor seats greatly outnumber the Liberal seats? And how much is left in that funding pool? Just to remind the minister: the first question was about the status of closed circuit TV cameras in Berwick and Boronia, and the second question was about the funding of the Safer Suburbs Plan, which appears to be strongly skewed in favour of government seats or very marginal Liberal seats.