First, a big tick in the box for Deputy Prime Minister, Richard Marles for going to Papua New Guinea and other South Pacific nations to try to solidify mutual security arrangements between them and Australia. But a big fail for Energy and Climate Minister Chris Bowen for his just plain wrong misrepresentation of the cost of nuclear power. Chris, it’s actually the cheapest form of power over the lifetime of its use (see world energy stats), and will get even cheaper with modular reactors. Such misinformation does not help the debate. 

Speaking of ministers who should know better, Chief Minister Andrew Barr and Attorney-General Shane Rattenbury did not exactly cover themselves in glory last week. 

On Tuesday, I went along with other victims of crime (we had all lost children in road accidents where the driver was affected by drugs) to listen to the debate on the need for an independent inquiry into sentencing and bail laws. The shadow Attorney-General, Jeremy Hanson, called on Mr Rattenbury to either conduct such an inquiry or be dismissed as Attorney-General in a vote of no confidence. The vote of no confidence was always going to fail on party lines: nine Liberals to 16 government members (six Greens, 10 ACT Labor). No surprises there. 

What was surprising and very disappointing was the Chief Minister’s arrogance in firstly not acknowledging the victims and then turning his back on them when he spoke. To his credit, he has since at least apologised to the Assembly for his behaviour, but an apology to the victims and the public would be nice, too. The Attorney-General, Mr Rattenbury, acknowledged the victims, but his stubborn refusal to back a simple request for an independent inquiry was very disappointing. What on earth could be the harm in that? This government has lots of inquiries into lots of things. Why not something as important and simple as an inquiry into sentencing and bail practices? 

Jeremy Hanson called on the Attorney-General to get a retired ACT judge to conduct the enquiry. In my view, he should have gone further, and asked for three ex-judges: one from the ACT and two from interstate to conduct the inquiry, as an ex-ACT judge alone might be a bit too soft.

It escapes me as to why Shane Rattenbury did not kill it all off by saying: “Look, Mr Hanson, I’ve been thinking a bit more about this, and on reflection, it’s a good idea, and we will do as you ask.” He would have come up smelling of roses for being reasonable, and Mr Hanson would have been happy as his motion would have gotten up. In the five or six Assemblies I was in – when we had a real crossbench, or even a half-sensible majority government like we had when Jon Stanhope was Chief Minister – this would occur on occasions.

However, the Attorney-General dug his heels in, and refused to back a perfectly sensible request. Whether it was pure ideology or just pigheadedness, or both, we will probably never know. 

Editor’s note: The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Canberra Daily.