Page 1205 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 24 June 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MRS CARNELL (4.25): The Liberal Party will be supporting passage of both the Domestic Violence (Amendment) Bill and the Crimes (Amendment) Bill (No. 2). I must, though, start by concurring with Mr Humphries that more time is needed to properly consider amendments of these kinds. A few weeks ago the Government was caught without much legislation to present, even though they had an operational executive during the election period. In response, the Government seems to have gone overboard, and we now have a sudden rush of legislation to deal with within a limited timeframe.
There is an appropriate middle course, and that is to introduce legislation at a steady and consistent pace, allowing adequate time for consideration and consultation with the community. I realise that some of these Bills have been generated in response to urgent requirements of various government and non-government bodies. But we on this side of the house have only a certain amount of staff and a certain amount of time. In this situation we have had time to speak to only a limited number of interested parties. This severely impacts upon our capacity to do our job as representatives of the Canberra people. Nevertheless, we have done our best to consider these domestic violence amendments in the time available.
The Domestic Violence (Amendment) Bill allows a sensible procedure which went on in the past to continue into the future. The procedure was for police to alert Domestic Violence Crisis Service workers about incidents of domestic violence. The Australian Federal Police would provide the Domestic Violence Crisis Service with names and addresses of those calling about domestic violence issues. This was regarded as a satisfactory situation. It went on for some time and, as far as I am aware, without adverse effects on the community. In fact, it facilitated our goals of improving support mechanisms for victims of domestic violence. Anything that will do this must be a positive for our community. Unfortunately, this procedure was disrupted in a very arbitrary way by the enactment of the Commonwealth Privacy Act.
I note that this Bill does something more than allow the police to provide relevant details to the Domestic Violence Crisis Service. In particular, it allows the police to provide details to any organisation as determined by the Minister. Nevertheless, the Assembly has a chance to review the decision of the Minister in approving an organisation as a crisis support organisation. Mr Connolly has indicated that he intends to approve the Domestic Violence Crisis Service as an approved organisation, and we support that. I hope that the Minister will not test the patience of this Assembly by ever attempting to nominate inappropriate organisations. Despite this anxiety, it is still necessary to have the option of including other organisations in the future; and the amendment, as drafted, gives the Minister that leeway, subject to the Subordinate Laws Act. I see no problem in restoring to legality a perfectly satisfactory situation which has operated in the past. On behalf of the Liberal members, I indicate our support.
The Crimes (Amendment) Bill (No. 2) extends police powers. Section 349D of the Crimes Act currently allows police, when making investigations pursuant to sections 349A, 349B and 349C, to seize weapons found in the possession of a person. Police powers to seize weapons have been unduly restricted by the words "in the possession of", and the proposed Bill corrects this situation. Police will now be able to seize any weapon found on the premises or surrounding
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .