Page 1656 - Week 06 - Thursday, 23 July 2020
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The breadth of anti-consorting laws is also a concern. The New South Wales Ombudsman found that anti-consorting laws were used in relation to a broad range of offending, including minor and nuisance offending. As noted by the Standing Committee on Justice and Community Safety in its scrutiny report that considered Mr Hanson’s earlier anti-consorting bill:
Mr Hanson’s bill prohibits a person from consorting with a person convicted of an indictable offence irrespective of whether the offence has any connection to organised criminal activity, or whether it is related to intimidating, harassing or violent conduct. There is also no limit for how long ago the offence may have been committed.
Although we are discussing OMCGs, these laws can have widespread impacts on all kinds of people. We have seen them operating in New South Wales, where the Ombudsman found that, unfortunately, there was an exceptionally high police error rate, in particular in relation to the laws being used against children and young people. I do not raise this to cast any aspersions on ACT Policing or even NSW Police, for that matter—it is just that these kinds of anti-consorting laws are not very good laws. They are difficult and not conducive to efficacious enforcement.
Mr Hanson is convinced that this is the answer. He decided that some time ago and has kept on that pathway, despite all the evidence to the contrary. Evidence from other jurisdictions shows that they are not doing their job and can have other impacts that were not intended. A series of other measures have been brought in in the ACT that are doing their job.
I was interested in the example from the Daily Telegraph that Mr Hanson shared with us today. Mr Hanson may correct me if I have misunderstood his example, but he basically said a gentleman was subject to curfews, that the court lifted the restrictions, this gentleman went to a bar, this incident took place and therefore we need anti-consorting laws. According to Mr Hanson, the judicial officer who oversaw the case lifted the conditions, the man involved was free to go and do what he wanted because his conditions had been lifted and so we need anti-consorting laws. Mr Hanson is adding one and one and getting four or five or six here, and I do not think that justifies the solution he is trying to impose on us.
To summarise the position of the Greens, we agree with efforts to combat violence and other criminal activities of organised crime, including outlaw motorcycle gangs. We want Canberrans to be safe. We value the work of our law enforcement in this arena. We are open to new initiatives but they need to be effective and they must avoid perverse outcomes. We cannot agree with passing an ineffective law, contrary to the evidence and where there is a high risk of perverse outcomes, just because there is concern about a particular issue. We will not be supporting the motion today and will be supporting the amendment moved by the Attorney-General.
MR GENTLEMAN (Brindabella—Minister for Advanced Technology and Space Industries, Minister for the Environment and Heritage, Minister for Planning and Land Management and Minister for Police and Emergency Services) (3.56): I want to thank, first of all, our hardworking police officers. Their dedication has helped make
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video