Page 5896 - Week 18 - Wednesday, 11 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Detail Stage
Bill, by leave, taken as a whole
MR COLLAERY (12.29), by leave: Mr Speaker, I move:
Clause 3, page 2, line 1, omit "who is of or above the age of 14 years".
Clause 3, page 2, line 10, new subsection (3), after "identification", insert ", including fingerprints, handprints or photographs".
Clause 3, page 2, line 11, omit "(1)", substitute "(3)".
Clause 3, page 2, line 12, omit "a photograph", substitute "photographs"; omit "14", substitute "18".
Clause 3, page 2, line 12, new subsection 353A(4), omit the subsection, substitute the following subsection:
"(4) Nothing in subsection (3) authorises action that would contravene section 36 of the Children's Services Act 1986.".
In providing instructions to counsel, I overlooked the provisions in section 36 of the Children's Services Act, which state that a child under the age of 18 years cannot be fingerprinted. I am indebted to the Attorney's officers for drawing that to my attention. I stress that this Bill has been looked at by the Director of Public Prosecutions.
The amendments seek to make some technical improvements, on the advice of Mr Connolly's officers, and accepted by Parliamentary Counsel. In the main sheet of amendments that has been circulated, paragraph 4 says, "omit '14', substitute '18'". That also is to bring the photograph issue into line with the Children's Services Act. It is now entirely consistent with the Children's Services Act.
Motion (by Mr Jensen) agreed to:
That so much of standing and temporary orders be suspended as would prevent debate on this Bill concluding.
MR STEVENSON (12.30): The initial Bill suggested that children over the age of 14 could have their fingerprints, photographs, et cetera, taken; but there is a provision within the Children's Services Act 1986 that prevents that happening. Mr Collaery's amendments will now protect children from such unwarranted actions. I agree with the Bill as it will be amended.
MR STEFANIAK (12.31): Whilst we have no problem with most of the Bill, it is something we would be looking at in future. It is obviously going to pass, as it is very important. We are mindful that law-breakers, no matter how old they are, are brought to justice.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .