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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 10 Hansard (30 August) . . Page.. 3836 ..

MR HARGREAVES (continuing):

Mr Speaker, I urge members to stop being afraid of consultation in this regard. Stop being afraid of people telling us where we might have got it wrong. Start listening to the people who are walking around town with a black eye, with extra mascara on trying to hide it, or to people who sit and quiver in fear in their own homes. It is men who go out there and belt these women. We have no right to pass this bill without proper consultation, without proper input by the experts, and the government's own experts at that. I do not see what on earth is wrong or what is so threatening about input from the Domestic Violence Prevention Council or the Rape Crisis Council. I urge every member in this place to put their feelings of threat behind them and to support Ms Tucker's amendment.

MS TUCKER (8.22): I seek leave to move a revised version of my amendment.

MR SPEAKER: I see that. It is being circulated now. Do you want to outline it?

MS TUCKER: I can speak to it as it is being circulated, if members are happy with that. Basically, I have revised the time period. People here have expressed concern that it was not enough time, so I have changed it from six months minimum and 12 months maximum to 18 months minimum and two years maximum, seeing that Mr Stefaniak and other members are concerned about the time being too short. I now move my revised amendment [see schedule 6 at page 3912].

MR MOORE (Minister for Health, Housing and Community Services) (8.23): I understand that the Attorney will be moving a further amendment to Ms Tucker's amendment. He is preparing that at the moment. I think it is reasonable for Ms Tucker to say that she recognises that an extra bit of time may be necessary and that she is prepared to make that compromise and revise her amendment. It seems to me that whenever we are dealing with things like domestic violence we all have to take an amount of care. The government recognises that. I believe the government is still opposed to her amendment, although we do recognise that this is a reasonably sensible move forward.

One of the government's concerns, I think, is that it is normal practice for a government to appoint a review. In this case the Legislative Assembly takes over that role and puts it into the bill. This Assembly recognises that where something is in an act the government is bound, and I presume that will be the case also in the Fourth Assembly.

Mr Kaine raised earlier the different methods we can use to have reviews like this done. A motion would achieve that as well. However, I think this will come down to a vote of the Assembly. One of the important things is the model domestic violence law. Ms Tucker's approach in seeking to ensure consistency with that is also important. In the first paragraph, we need to check the six months there and make sure that it is consistent with the later part of the amendment.

The other difficulty, Mr Speaker, is that this is a very late amendment to something that has been on the table for some time, particularly considering the amount of criticism that was levelled at my good friend and colleague Mr Stefaniak about his lack of consultation. Mr Speaker, I understand that Mr Stefaniak will be circulating his amendment shortly to see whether we can get a sensible agreement to this.

Debate (on motion by Mr Moore ) adjourned to a later hour.

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