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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 8 Hansard (31 August) . . Page.. 2709 ..


MS TUCKER (continuing):

Hope was one of the important group of literate and intellectual figures of Canberra of the 1950s and 1960s. Along with Judith Wright, Manning Clarke and Sir Mark Oliphant, Hope was a key part of a very different Canberra which centred on an academic and cultural community that created a notion of Australian identity afraid neither of intellect nor of passion. Geoff Page, a highly regarded Australian poet who was also a Canberra school teacher, said of AD Hope:

He showed that poetry in the discursive mode was a valid art form in Australia. You could talk about things that were important in a leisurely and well-structured manner. His poetry wasn't particularly lyrical; it was talkative and thoughtful and investigative.

Described by poet Robert Gray as "the verbal equivalent of Norman Lindsay", Hope's poetry was also often highly erotic and satirical. His great interest in the traditional poetic forms of poets such as Pope and Dryden and the consequent discipline of expressing his big ideas in a tight form gave his writing extraordinary energy. AD Hope's contribution to Canberra, to poetry and to Australia's cultural identity was profound.

Question resolved in the affirmative, members standing in their places.

JUSTICE AND COMMUNITY SAFETY-STANDING COMMITTEE

Reference-Defamation Bill 1999

MR HUMPHRIES (Treasurer, Attorney-General and Minister for Justice and Community Safety) (10.55): I move:

That the Standing Committee on Justice and Community Safety inquire into and report by the last sitting day in December 2000 on the Defamation Bill 1999 with particular reference to:

(1) whether the ACT should return to the common law formulation of the defence of truth (section 16);

(2) whether the ACT should adopt a defence based on negligence (section 23); and

(3) whether, under the proposed offer of amends provision (section 6), a plaintiff should be able to claim, not only recompense for expenses but also compensation for the damage done to a victim's reputation and business.

Mr Speaker, the Defamation Bill was introduced into this place on 9 December last year. It is a very significant piece of legislation. It is certainly the most significant package of reform of the ACT's defamation laws that has yet been presented and, as far as I am aware, the most significant change to defamation law in any Australian state or territory. Perhaps partly as a result of the size and the diversity of the reforms within this legislation, there has been some degree to which people have been nonplussed by the range of issues that the bill presents.


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