Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 10 Hansard (25 November) . . Page.. 2901 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

Members are quite clear on what I and the community want to know from any member considering supporting this Bill. I listed this morning in arguing for an adjournment the issues that I think require clarification. I circulated that list to people so that they would not have to take notes, but I have noticed that nobody has bothered to address any of those issues. I find that very concerning. I have asked Mr Rugendyke whether he is interested in responding. He says basically that he wants this matter out of the way. Mr Kaine says that he does not think he needs to respond. No-one else has felt the need to do that. These are important questions that need clarification and if the people in this place who are going to support this Bill have not articulated clearly how they think these problems can be addressed, then we are indeed a sham of a parliament.

Since then, of course, we have had more questions, quite a few more. The DPP came out with an analysis of Mr Osborne's Bill. We now have a DPP analysis of the proposed amendments of Mr Moore. There are still serious concerns. How can a parliament push through this Bill when we have those kinds of questions unanswered? (Further extension of time granted) We still have not heard any reasonable answers to the concerns raised by the Discrimination Commissioner. We have just had a slur on her character by Mr Osborne, which is really not a particularly satisfactory response.

Debate interrupted.

MR SPEAKER: Order! It being 5.00 pm, I propose the question:

That the Assembly do now adjourn.

Mr Moore: I require the question to be put forthwith without debate.

Question resolved in the negative.

Debate resumed.

MS TUCKER: I also had a few more questions put to me at lunchtime by a solicitor. One question was regarding whose responsibility it would be to prove that the literature was given, read and understood. Do you need an independent solicitor or position statement to that effect, as is currently the case in most commercial matters? A number of issues were raised about the resource implications of this Bill. The resource implications for the courts were raised by the DPP as well. Another question someone might like to answer is: Will any community legal education process be undertaken to advise ACT women and girls of the new legal requirements if the Bill is passed? If so, by which organisation and how would that be funded?

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .