Page 1313 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 11 April 2018
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Lastly, they must consider a change in approach with greater emphasis on individual risk-based assessments.
An individual risk approach would put greater scrutiny on people who engage in unsafe sex instead of focusing on the gender of a person’s chosen partner. This approach would help to destigmatise same-sex relationships and to encourage safe sex. Let us reject unnecessary discrimination against queer men in our community. I call on all members in this place to support the motion.
MR STEEL (Murrumbidgee) (5.41): I will be short—I just want to address the amendment circulated by Mrs Dunne, which the minister has already addressed, and I agree with her views. My view is that the expert panel of the Australian Red Cross Blood Service is best placed to get on with its review on these matters rather than undertaking an Assembly inquiry. My understanding is that the review will have an outcome by the end of the year, so I would not want to have a concurrent process proceeding. I understand that there will be public consultation as part of that review, so it will provide a somewhat similar process to an Assembly committee inquiry for those who are interested in the issues.
This motion seeks to call on the TGA simply to consider the matters outlined in the motion in 4(a), (b) and (c), with the keyword being “consider”. I would be very surprised if these issues were not already being considered. It is entirely reasonable to support the adoption of the recommendations of the expert panel of the Red Cross Blood Donor Service without first having conducted an Assembly inquiry. We know well the scope of their review from last time and what they have recommended in the past. I expect they will do good work again. While raising issues of concern is valid—and we have done that through this motion—we have to defer to the experts to make a call, and that is exactly what this motion’s intention is. I do not support the amendment, but I appreciate Mrs Dunne’s interest in this issue. I commend the motion to the Assembly as it is.
Amendment negatived.
Original question resolved in the affirmative.
Privilege—alleged breach
Statement by Speaker
MADAM SPEAKER: Members, on 22 March 2018 Ms Cody gave written notice of a possible breach of privilege concerning certain aspects of the conduct of Miss C Burch and Ms Lee as well as the use of the Liberal Party website to transmit submissions to the public accounts committee inquiry. I will provide a copy of Ms Cody’s letter for the information of members.
Under the provisions of standing order 276 I must determine as soon as practicable whether or not the matter merits precedence over other business. If, in my opinion, the matter does merit precedence, I will inform the Assembly of the decision and the member who raised the matter may move a motion without notice and forthwith to refer the matter to a select committee appointed by the Assembly for that purpose.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video