Page 1880 - Week 07 - Thursday, 20 August 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
conversation, or where each principal party to the conversation, expressly or impliedly, consents to the use of a listening device. Other significant provisions prohibit the communication or publication of a record of a private conversation by a person or a person party to a private conversation obtained by the use of a listening device without the consent of the principal parties to that conversation.
The penalty provisions have been devised to prevent further damage, as far as practical, that would be caused by the publication or communication of a private conversation obtained through the unlawful use of a listening device. Part III of the Bill specifies that evidence obtained by the use of a listening device is inadmissible in civil or criminal proceedings unless consent is given by each principal party or in other certain specified circumstances. I consider the evidence provisions to be the crux of the legislation, as I recognise that such legislation will be difficult to enforce because of the sophisticated technological nature of many listening devices. In many cases it is impossible to detect whether such a device is being used. Hence, the inadmissibility of evidence obtained by the unlawful use of a listening device will be the most effective means of deterring and eliminating these covert activities.
This Bill is an important statement of principle. The Bill will establish safeguards against the unjustified invasion of privacy that can be occasioned by the use of listening devices. The physical limits that once guarded individual and group privacy have been broken down by sophisticated eavesdropping technology. The tolerance of such surveillance practices is incompatible with freedom of expression, freedom of thought, and the important principles to which a free society must adhere. I present the explanatory memorandum to the Bill.
Debate (on motion by Mr Humphries) adjourned.
LEGAL AFFAIRS - STANDING COMMITTEE
Amendment to Reference
MR HUMPHRIES (10.43): I move:
That the resolution of the Assembly of 25 June 1992, referring the accessibility of the legal system to the Standing Committee on Legal Affairs for inquiry and report, be amended by omitting paragraph 1(e).
Members will recall that on 25 June the Assembly adopted for the Legal Affairs Standing Committee an inquiry into a number of matters dealing with both the cost of justice in the ACT and the question of whether the legal profession should retain control over conveyancing of property or adopt a system similar to the land brokerage system used in South Australia and elsewhere. The motion I have moved today seeks the omission of paragraph (e) from that term of reference, namely, the reference dealing with land brokerage and conveyancing.
Madam Speaker, I spoke to you yesterday about conventions in this place, and I want to refer to another convention, namely, one that applies when this Assembly decides to refer matters to select and standing committees for inquiry. On a number of occasions when matters of contention have come before this house, it has been the view of the house that these matters should be referred to
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .