Page 3851 - Week 11 - Thursday, 24 November 2022
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
here, the government will not support her truly excessive request and will support Mr Braddock’s amendment, to allow for an extra week for the inquiry to be conducted and not to double the amount of time for an inquiry into what is quite a narrow issue.
MS LEE (Kurrajong—Leader of the Opposition) (5.37): The reason that I brought this motion to the Assembly is that we are talking about significant reform to the way evidence that is adduced in court will be treated. The Attorney-General went into some detail and history about everything that has gone by. If he has to go back over 10 years and rehash what happened back then, it goes to exactly why we need an open and thorough inquiry into this issue.
Mr Barr: Is that the best you’ve got?
MS LEE: Are you going to let me finish, or are you going to keep—
MADAM SPEAKER: Ms Lee, the advice that I provide to those on the right—
Mr Hanson: On a point of order, Madam Speaker—
MADAM SPEAKER: Mr Hanson, sit down.
Mr Hanson: Regularly, people will raise a point under the standing orders by—
MADAM SPEAKER: I do not need a lecture by way of interjection from you, Mr Hanson. Ms Lee, you have the floor.
MS LEE: The Attorney-General tries to say, “I’m perplexed that Ms Lee has moved this and has sought extra time for this inquiry.” That is the part that is perplexing. We are talking about a reform that is being brought here; it is being dropped into the final sitting period. Mr Braddock’s amendment seeks a reporting date that is before the parliamentary sitting calendar even starts next year, and through a Christmas and new year period. The question really should be: why the rush? If the Attorney-General is trying to say that this is not a rush, why were stakeholders given 48 hours to provide feedback on the exposure draft of this bill?
Let me be very clear: when it comes to reform that is designed to remove barriers for people who are participating in court proceedings, when it comes to sexual or family violence, the Assembly has demonstrated time and again that we are willing to work together. Every single step of the way, all of us have been cognisant of respecting all stakeholders to ensure that this important work is done in a thorough, conscientious and respectful way. Giving various stakeholders 48 hours to provide feedback is anything but thorough, conscientious and respectful.
Mr Braddock, in moving his amendment, spoke about the fact that, “Of course, the bill’s going to go to the scrutiny of bills committee.” Of course, it will. But we are talking about law reform, and my motion clearly requests that the Standing Committee on Justice and Community Safety undertake an inquiry. A bill that will have an impact on, as the Attorney-General says, many people in this community
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video