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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 9 Hansard (21 August) . . Page.. 3071 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

did not. I think my views on these topics are well known, as are the views of other members of the Liberal Party.

If this bill is passed, candidates from our party will be, in the lead-up to the referendum, supporting both sides and possibly combinations of the two questions. I think that is a healthy thing. The Canberra community is certainly well and truly capable of making an informed decision on these questions-an informed decision that we would accept.

For example, Mr Deputy Speaker, I think my views on the shooting gallery are well known. I do not think it is a sensible idea at all. However, if the majority of Canberra citizens wanted us to do that I would certainly adhere to their views, as would indeed my colleagues. I think Mrs Burke is very supportive of the shooting gallery and also a heroin trial. But if the community said no to both of those questions, she would adhere to the community view and we would look at other ways of tackling the problem.

This is a worldwide problem and some countries are dealing with it better than others. Like Mr Osborne and Mr Rugendyke, I am quite impressed by the way the Swedes approach the problem. The Swedes have an interesting system of government and a lot of the things they do are very trendy. But on this issue they have not gone down the track of being excessively liberal. They have a very comprehensive package to deal with this very real social issue, and they appear to be tackling the evils of drug use in a very sensible, effective and holistic way. That is certainly something that I think we should explore. I think there is a lot more we can do and should do. Yes, it would probably cost more money but I think we need to see what we can do to rehabilitate offenders and users.

Late in the debate Mr Osborne raised a very good point about the shooting gallery legislation-I think only six people, including me, voted against it-kicking back in at the beginning of the next Assembly. I think people have forgotten that this will happen. If we had a referendum, the people of Canberra would have a chance to vote and we would be able to resolve these very important issues. If they wanted to have the safe injecting room, a shooting gallery, call it what you like, and a heroin trial, they could say yes.

Mr Deputy Speaker, probably a number of people in this place think they can pick what the electorate will do, and maybe that is the reason in some instances for their support or otherwise of this legislation. I think it would be very hard to pick what the people of Canberra would do. In fact, before we knew that this legislation would go down, I bet my colleague Mr Hird a couple of schooners that the people of Canberra would say no to the shooting gallery but yes to a heroin trial. Mr Hird did not agree-he thought it would be two noes. We will never know, we will never find out. I will not have the pleasure of buying him a couple of schooners or he will not have the pleasure of doing that for me, because we will simply never know.

It is not a sign of weakness and it is not an indication of the government abrogating responsibility to hold a referendum on crucially important questions like this-questions that potentially in many ways divide the community. There are many different views. Some people are passionately against shooting galleries and heroin trials, and other people passionately believe that these things should be trialled. There are very strong views one way or the other.

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