Page 5484 - Week 17 - Wednesday, 4 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
To be confronted within a week with two diametrically opposing proposals for reform reinforces the Labor Party in its view that reform is necessary, but we are not prepared to support either model today or next week. We think we need to have an extensive process of discussion and debate within the community on the appropriate legal regime for reform of prostitution law. To be confronted one week with the regulatory model and another week with the deregulatory model and told that we have to vote to change the law this week in a way that is totally different from the proposed changes to the law last week, to us, seems to be law reform on the run, and law reform on the run is fraught with a vast range of dangers.
I am not sure how extensive the community consultation has been on the deregulatory model as opposed to the regulatory model that was being proposed up until a week ago. This is an issue of sensitivity, an issue where reform is needed, where the community needs to come to grips with the appropriate legal regime to allow prostitution to operate within this community. We all accept that the old legal approach of saying that prostitution is unlawful and should be banned is hypocritical and has never worked here or in any other part of Australia or the world. So the law needs to come to terms with the fact that prostitution will continue to operate within the community, as it always has.
Having got general agreement to that proposition, we then need to look very carefully at the appropriate model for reform. When we are confronted with diametrically opposite models within a week, we have to say that this idea is not clearly enough thought through and we ought to delay deciding which is the appropriate model until there has been more consultation, more examination by, we suggest, the Community Law Reform Committee, because it comprises both lawyers and lay members of the community. Certainly, let us go ahead with reform of prostitution law, but let us ensure that the Assembly gets it right. Let us not rush, within a week, from one model to another.
DR KINLOCH (11.05): I would like to endorse Mr Connolly's remarks. First of all, though, I acknowledge the very considerable work Mr Moore has put into this. I hope he will also come to see the legitimacy and correctness of Mr Connolly's point of view that this is not a political matter. People say to me, "You are playing politics with it". Not at all; I see this as a matter to be treated very carefully indeed, not rushed into. The state of prostitution and procuring and pimping is what it is; it has been going on for a long time. I recognise that. We are not going to resolve all those matters overnight - certainly not before Christmas - and I see no need to rush into this.
I also endorse the suggestion of referring it to the Law Reform Committee. I made some inquiries about that and realise that that would be an excellent avenue. Of course, one does not condemn and must not condemn people who are
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .