Page 1960 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 15 June 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR STEVENSON (12.14), by leave: I still have grave concerns about ID cards, although one can give good reasons for these things. It is not that anyone in this Assembly would ever use such a thing in an untoward manner, but think of the future. What concerns me is that things become acceptable. Income tax was first introduced at one per cent as a temporary measure. You never know. Sometimes people forget these things. Later on you could have the remarkable situation where much of what you earn is taken by some other people who say that they need to do so in order to benefit the community as a whole. This, of course, is creating the troubles we have in our community. That is something that may need to be fought in the future. Some people may say, "We have had it for a long time and people have accepted it. We need to make sure that people do have proof of identification. If they do not, we must ask why. What do they have to hide?". This is the concern of a lot of people in Australia - I think, most people in Australia. As I said, that may be something that we will need to fight in the future.
It is good that the Minister said that this card will be introduced. It is good to see that matters on the notice paper are being acknowledged by people in the Executive. If they regularly go through the notice paper, look at these things and start taking them on board, start considering whether or not something is going to benefit Canberrans, it will save a great deal of time in this Assembly. That is a benefit.
MR HUMPHRIES (12.16): I obviously support this motion. Let us not use Orwellian euphemisms. We are talking about a pubcard designed to facilitate the identification and age of drinkers.
Mr Stevenson: It does not say that in the motion, by the way.
MR HUMPHRIES: No, it does not; but that is what it is.
Mr Stevenson: It talks about an identification.
MR HUMPHRIES: That is quite true; but that is what it is. It is not so much about identification as about letting people know that they are old enough to be able to legally drink in this Territory, and do other things, which I will come to in a moment. Obviously, it is supported by this side of the chamber. We have called for this initiative for at least three years, or somewhat longer, I suspect. We also argue that it is high time the measure was introduced. It is a need which has been clearly identified, not just by the committee to which Ms Szuty referred but also by the police who, on a day-to-day basis, have had to deal with the rampant problem of under-age drinking in this Territory. A great many people below the age of 18 years in this community have access to alcohol. That access is extremely free. There have been few effective barriers to them obtaining that access in the past, and it is important that we do something at the level of legislation, or take other measures, to ensure that that access is restricted. I am not sure what the argument about prohibition would say in this respect; but it seems to me that in the case of young people it is important that they not be able to purchase liquor freely in shops, bars and taverns around this Territory. That, clearly, does not encourage a responsible attitude towards drinking.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .