Page 5493 - Week 17 - Wednesday, 4 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Alternatively, they will find in a scheming way a method of somehow avoiding the situation. The methodology here is one of Mr Collaery's very favourite methodologies, one he has used constantly, and that is section 65 of the self-government Act. He wants to put these amendments, but the only way he can put them is to put them in breach of section 65. So, he will not be able to put them; therefore, it is better not to do anything. He gives us the chance not to come down on the side of civil liberties - because that is what this Bill is about.
The reality is that Mr Connolly continues to express this idea of a range of hugely different models, which simply is not true. We do not have a range of incredibly different models. We have had no moves whatsoever from the Government. They have had this committee's report on the table since April. They have been in government for more than the three months that is the normal convention period in which to respond.
Mr Collaery: Why bag us because we cannot draw your amendments?
MR MOORE: I have bagged the Rally, that is right; and now I am going to start bagging Labor, because I believe that both are responsible.
Mr Duby: Well, get to it.
MR MOORE: Thank you, Mr Duby, for that encouragement. The Labor Government, as the left wing of the Labor Party, wants to be seen as the social reformers in the ACT. But whenever it comes to actual social reform, it seems that they want to drag their heels. They are very enthusiastic about dragging their heels, coming up with nothing.
They have had the opportunity. The Bill has been tabled for some time. I made it very clear that I was open to discussion with all members. Ms Maher spent extensive amounts of time with me discussing the amendments. Mrs Nolan and Mr Stefaniak have also spent a tremendous amount of time asking me why I was doing this, what was the point behind it, how did it come out of the committee's report, and I have been only too delighted to provide explanations.
The reality is that this Bill in this form will simply remove the bad laws, although most of that is done in the Prostitution (Consequential Amendments) Bill. It also will provide for some protections where our community considers that they are absolutely necessary. We have bad laws now. The police are in an unenviable position. We are in a position to do something about it, and we ought to wear that responsibility. It fools no-one at all to say that we want to send this off for further consultation.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .