Mr DEAN ( Windermere ) - The member for Nelson is right. The bill has been in the making, I think, for something like six years and, in fact, it commenced when I was in the job and I volunteered to give my DNA then, as did a lot of my colleagues at the time. One of the frustrations at the beginning of this whole process was that it was deemed by many police that there was a lot of bullying going on to have them enter into this program and they put up the shutters and said, 'No, we won't be involved in it'. That caused a lot of the original frustrations on this matter.

It was not as though police were trying to cover for themselves or anybody else, it was the fact that they believed, rightly or wrongly, that they were being bullied into a process that they had some concerns about at that time.

As I said, I was involved at the beginning. The police are the only profession, as I understand, where they need to provide a DNA sample. I understand that it is in place in Western Australia. I think that it is in place with the Federal Police. Going back a few months, South Australia were still negotiating, and they have now probably finalised their position as well. I am confident that other organisations will go down a similar track.

The situation that was raised with me by a police officer was that if this bill is enacted - and it should be - and they provide their DNA which is checked against a crime scene and they were involved in that crime, my understanding is that that process would finish then. They would then need to go through the other legal and lawful process to obtain the DNA to connect that person with the crime. It was an issue that was raised. Hopefully it is never likely to happen.

This was never going to be difficult with new police officers coming into the organisation because they would know that providing DNA was part of joining Tasmania Police Service. The sticking point originally was with the more mature police officers that have been around for a long time, and I suspect that they are the ones who have not given DNA.

Ms Forrest - The old fellows, you mean?

Mr DEAN - No, more mature; there are no old police officers. The more mature police officers think that it was an infringement of their rights. A lot of the police officers say that they are already impacted on in their social lives. They are. A police officer does face a lot of difficulties. If they simply want to go to a hotel for a beer, a drink - even with their family - there are many instances where they are hassled. There were many occasions when that happened to me and you have to be very selective as to where you go. That is the view of police; that they cannot lead a normal life as such, they are stopped from that.

Mr Wilkinson - It is why they make good politicians; it is all the pre-training they do.

Mr DEAN - You are right, it is bit like politicians finding it is a bit difficult at times to go out as well.

They saw this as another intrusion into their lives. Hopefully that attitude is changing and I think that the majority of police officers will comply on a voluntary basis. Only a few now have to comply, and they will comply.

Ms Thorp - And they will only have to comply should they be present at a crime scene.

Mr DEAN - That is right.

Ms Thorp - It may never come off.

Mr DEAN - That is right. And, on leaving the Police Service, it is destroyed and you can also apply in writing for that to occur. I have never applied in writing and I do not particularly care whether if it is still there or not. I suspect that might well be the case with many other police officers, but it should be destroyed on their exiting Tasmania Police.

Ms Thorp - That is what the act says.

Mr DEAN - The act says that so there is now an obligation on the Police Commissioner to ensure that is the situation, but I do not think that it would concern too many police if it remained there forever and a day.