Page 668 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 5 July 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The track record in the ACT has been of ordinances brought in under subordinate powers over the years, very often without public consultation. This is an historic moment - the creation of this committee, the first select committee in the ACT to look at a criminal law amendment, a look that will be by the people and for the people.
The critical issue today is that the committee examines the concerns raised about the Bill and examines the drafting of it because, as you may know, Mr Speaker, the Residents Rally suggested at certain processing stages considerable changes to this Bill. The Rally wanted the police power to be restricted to an officer having reasonable grounds to believe that a crime of violence or damage to property is about to occur.
That is a long, long way from the empty, exaggerated rhetoric we heard outside about the vast threat to civil liberties and the like coming from Building Workers Industrial Union people, who are busy on a site building an embassy for the Chinese fascist Government, which has just suffocated the right to peaceful demonstration. There are great ironies in that situation, Mr Speaker.
The Rally is also interested in knowing what view the select committee will take of a proposal that, if there are very, very wide community concerns and if they are justified in the committee context, there be a sunset provision in the law, lapsing the law after 12 months, when perhaps other legislative amendments, particularly to the liquor licensing laws, can be brought into effect and when we have power over the police and can determine whether they are foot patrolling enough and the like.
They are all issues that will face the committee. Likewise there will be very forceful submissions from those persons who have been the victims of dreadful, unprovoked and hideous violence in this community, which has stemmed, from time to time, from premeditated groupings of persons who have been seen to be about the community and in dark areas but who have not been moved on by the police.
It is all very well to look at the civil rights issues. I speak for myself on this issue, having been the defending counsel on many occasions, often opposing my colleague Mr Stefaniak, and often in situations where the police have used the offensive behaviour and indecent language laws that currently exist, simply because they are being heckled and because they do not have the opportunity to tell these people to leave. They do exploit the situation of offensive behaviour. It is only three weeks since I defended a charge that involved a young person standing opposite a club in this town, heckling the police who were dealing, with some difficulty, with a brawl in the centre of the road. A police officer came over and took offence at what was said against that fence line.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .