Page 4851 - Week 16 - Monday, 25 November 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I was one of the members of that committee, and I have to say that an enormous amount of work went into that report - and an enormous amount of detailed discussion, not only here in the ACT but right around Australia. It is interesting to note that State jurisdictions right around Australia are making moves to reform prostitution. I think it was Mr Stefaniak who mentioned the fact that it has been around for a very, very long time. I think it was Mr Humphries who said that there may be other industries that have been around longer, but the reality is that it has been around for some considerable time.
I think it is highly appropriate that, as a result of that committee report, which was tabled in April 1991, Mr Moore, as chairman of that committee, has now decided to introduce this legislation into the Assembly. I support the legislation in principle. I have to say that during the committee's deliberations I had concerns which differed from those of Mr Moore, and I recall that Mr Wood also made additional comments. I am not sure whether he agrees with the comments that he made then or with the comments that he has just made, but they do seem to differ slightly.
However, my concerns are still the same, and I would like to see amendments made to the Bill so that in fact there is not such a licensing board. I do not think there should be a board with statutory power. I think that particular board should be within the Health Department and certainly should not have statutory power. That has been my position all the way along, and it is one that I will be articulating at the detail stage, when I will actually put forward amendments.
I need to make mention of a couple of other matters. Again nothing has changed. One relates to brothel ownership, if you like. I have always believed that we should not be able to restrict a business to being owned only by an ACT resident. I said in my additional comments that there may be some constitutional question relating to that. I still support that view, and I will put forward an amendment to delete that particular subclause.
I have had discussions with Brothel Owners Affiliation Pty Ltd, or the BOA. That organisation has submitted, I think to all members, some detailed concerns that it has. They are not concerns about the in-principle support for the Bill; they relate to specific clauses. Some of those I agree with; some I do not. However, even though I do not think this is an appropriate time to debate the matter, especially after the debate we had only a week ago on titles for Bills, I think that this Bill needs to be retitled. I would much prefer to see it called the Brothel Bill rather than the Prostitution Bill, because it really is about the licensing of brothels. I am sure that Mr Moore will indicate to me whether that is acceptable to him. I did mention that matter to him and, again, I will be putting forward an amendment to change the title to the Brothel Bill 1991.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .