Page 3296 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 22 August 2012

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

of any of the following characteristics of the person or members of the group: race; sexuality; gender identity; HIV/AIDS status”. Religion is proposed to be added to that list of characteristics.

These amendments to the act will further strengthen the ACT’s already robust anti-discrimination and human rights framework by introducing protections for minorities in our community.

There are some, I know, who will argue that this bill represents a limitation on the right to freedom of expression. The government’s view is that any limitation on the freedom of expression imposed by the bill is balanced with the promotion of rights. These limitations are justified to the extent that the bill acts to reinforce our community’s commitment to the eradication of acts of discrimination and is consistent with the relevant international conventions. I commend the bill to the Assembly.

Debate (on motion by Mrs Dunne) adjourned.

Standing order 172—suspension

Motion (by Mr Corbell) agreed to, with the concurrence of an absolute majority:

That standing order 172 be suspended to allow the question “That this bill be agreed to in principle” to be determined this sitting in relation to the Taxation Administration Amendment Bill 2012 and the Election Commitments Costing Bill 2012.

Taxation Administration Amendment Bill 2012

Debate resumed from 14 August 2012, on motion by Mr Barr:

That this bill be agreed to in principle.

MR SMYTH (Brindabella) (10.50): Agreed.

MR RATTENBURY (Molonglo) (10.50): The Greens will also be supporting the bill this evening. I think that Ms Hunter may even have an additional paragraph to add to my extensive comments. I wish to ensure that she gets to deliver her prepared comments.

MS HUNTER (Ginninderra—Parliamentary Leader, ACT Greens) (10.51): The Greens support this bill. It is a commonsense change to resolve what appears to be a relatively straightforward oversight. The scrutiny of bills committee made the important point that simply asserting that we are returning to the previous status quo is not a proper justification for a law that limits a human right.

The Greens support the bill and the limitation on the right to privacy that it creates. I am satisfied that this is only a minor limitation that is proportionate to the reasonable end it seeks to achieve and that it is the least restrictive means of doing so. Ensuring

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