POLICE VIDEO CAMERAS

The Hon. T.J. STEPHENS (15:17): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Leader of the Government, representing the Minister for Police, a question about in-car and body-worn video cameras for front-line police officers.

Leave granted.

The Hon. T.J. STEPHENS: As a former police minister, the leader would be well aware of calls from the Australian police association and police officers for the rollout of in-car and body-worn video cameras. Taking an interest in his old portfolio, I am sure the leader would also know that a six month trial of body-worn video cameras is set to begin in Queensland, while New South Wales highway patrol cars are being fitted with 360° cameras. Body-worn cameras, in particular, are affordable, costing as little as $200 each, and will increase public confidence in our police, help to secure more convictions and, most importantly, help protect our dedicated front-line police.

We all know that this government dragged the chain on tasers and semiautomatic pistols for police, as called for by the opposition ad nauseam in this place, maintaining that it was an operational matter for the police commissioner and not its responsibility. UK police have had these crime-fighting tools for some time to help them carry out the role effectively, in particular minimising the time officers spend in court, keeping them off the beat. My question is: will this government support an urgent trial of in-car and body-worn video cameras to ensure our police resources are maximised?

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister Assisting the Premier in Public Sector Management) (15:18): What I can say to the honourable member, having been police minister, is that, all the time, new emerging technologies come on the market that have the potential to improve the work of the police officers. Many of those are promoted by companies that seek the adoption of their particular product.

What happens is that, at any one time, one state will trial a technology, then make that information available to other states. It might be one particular piece, such as face recognition, for example. When I was minister, it was being looked at in one state, and other technologies in other states. There is always new technology coming onto the market and, clearly, like every other area of government, those responsible—the police commissioner—have to make their assessment about whether that is good value for money.

We do not have in this state, unfortunately, an open chequebook for every desirable cause, and members opposite are in this place every day telling us how we should be cutting taxes and spending more money here and more money there. Unfortunately, there are far more demands on the public purse than there is finance available. In relation to that particular technology, I will refer the question to the Minister for Police in another place to see whether that equipment has been or will be subject to any evaluation here.