Page 991 - Week 04 - Thursday, 18 June 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
attract the same penalty as for a breach of an ACT order; that is, a fine not exceeding $1,000 or imprisonment for a period not exceeding six months or both. This reflects the position adopted at the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General meeting already mentioned.
The Bill provides that a registered interstate order may be enforced against a person named in that order as if it were an order that had been personally served on the person. This relaxation of the usual requirement of personal service in relation to a court order is justified in view of the need to maintain the anonymity of the victim and the prohibitive costs of effecting interstate service. However, the scheme envisages that the respondent will be warned at the time the original order issues that the order may be registered and enforced in any State or Territory. The domestic violence issue is an issue that will continue to generate a high level of public attention. The enactment of this legislation will emphasise the innovative stance that the ACT is already perceived to have taken in relation to this major social problem and will show the way for other States and Territories. I commend the Bill to members of the Assembly and, Madam Speaker, I present the explanatory memorandum.
Debate (on motion by Mr Humphries) adjourned.
PROTECTION ORDERS (RECIPROCAL ARRANGEMENTS)
(CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS) BILL 1992
MR CONNOLLY (Attorney-General, Minister for Housing and Community Services and Minister for Urban Services) (10.58): Madam Speaker, I present the Protection Orders (Reciprocal Arrangements) (Consequential Amendments) Bill 1992.
Title read by Clerk.
MR CONNOLLY: Madam Speaker, I move:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
This Bill is designed to operate in conjunction with the Protection Orders (Reciprocal Arrangements) Bill 1992, which has just been brought before the Assembly. It contains consequential amendments necessary for the effective operation of the portability scheme which the primary Bill has sought to implement. This so-called portability scheme is designed to achieve portability of domestic violence protection orders interstate. It will be necessary for other jurisdictions to enact reciprocal legislation setting up similar procedures for registration of orders made in other States or Territories before the coverage will be complete. There has been an undertaking by all Premiers and Chief Ministers, in November, again at the instigation of the Chief Minister, to instruct all Attorneys-General to have legislation prepared giving effect to the scheme.
Part II of the Bill amends the Domestic Violence Act 1986 under which domestic violence protection orders are granted, whilst Part III amends the Magistrates Court Act 1930 under which the peace orders are issued. Essentially, the Bill has two key features. Firstly, the Bill amends both the Domestic Violence Act and the Magistrates Court Act to ensure that the respondent is informed of the possible impact of the portability scheme upon the operation of any protection order the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .