Page 128 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 14 February 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
testing, notification of infections and, in particular, confidentiality.
This is an area of extreme sensitivity. It involves a balance between the individual's rights and the rights of the community to be protected against the spread of the disease. One issue which presents this balance starkly is the question of restraining HIV-infected people who knowingly run the risk of infecting other people. Unfortunately, four days after I announced this review the Opposition's spokesman on health, Mr Berry, bought into this issue with a very insensitive tirade. In particular, his press release following my comments made the inflammatory suggestion that the Alliance Government would follow the lead of the Greiner Government and lock up victims.
Mr Berry: Well, it has done it on other areas.
MR HUMPHRIES: Not the Alliance Government, Mr Speaker. It certainly has not. It is an exaggeration to say "victims", in any case, in respect of the Greiner Government since only one person has been restrained in that State. The point I make about that, Mr Speaker, is that Mr Berry's comments were an attempt to sensationalise a very sensitive and delicate area in relation to which government policy needs to be based on what is right and what is a sensitive response to the issues, not what makes the biggest headlines or looks the most sensational in a question at question time. I think Mr Berry's approach should have been quite different, given his experience in government. I have to say that I think that it was very unfortunate.
We will be taking a very responsible approach in this area. If we have to explore ways of restraining people from making deliberate attempts to infect other people, that would be a responsible health decision based on the criteria, which we, as any responsible government, would have to face. I indicate at this stage that we will be facing up to those issues in that way.
Executive Deputies
MR BERRY: My question is directed to the Chief Minister. In the light of his response to my question yesterday on Executive Deputies, would he explain the following: at the Australia Day sports carnival, at which Mr Stefaniak made a speech, he was asked how he should be introduced. Mr Stefaniak said "as Minister for sport", and he was so introduced. At the Prime Minister's cricket match he was widely introduced and acknowledged as the ACT Minister for sport. More recently, at the Chief Minister's cricket match, in your presence, Chief Minister, he was introduced as the Minister for sport by the cricket association. Will you acknowledge that this is evidence of not only the confusion in the community but also specific and improper usurping of the designation of "Minister" by Mr Stefaniak.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .