Page 1080 - Week 04 - Thursday, 1 April 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
However, if the rights of the accused individuals are to be protected, then this is the only course of action we can take to preserve the dignity and compassion of the society in which we all are forced to live.
Let us look at what Mr Williams is saying in that particular statement. He is saying that there is discrimination against men with this legislation. He is also saying that it would be most unfortunate if the people who are concerned about that discrimination against men had to take legal action on the discrimination viewpoint. Again and again in the letter he asks for balance, for consultation. He said:
This is a personal invitation to you to come along and at least see for yourself the legitimate grievances of those who are being prejudiced by the current domestic violence legislation and its operation ...
At least Mr Moore and Helen Szuty went along to hear those grievances. Nobody in the Labor Party went along to hear the other side. Is that fairly representing the people of Canberra? The Chief Minister says that nobody has to go along to any public meeting. Of course they do not. In many cases you find that they do not. How do they choose? Basically, it is an ideological choice. At the meetings that I go to I find again and again that members of the Labor Party are notable by their absence because of the particular issue that the meetings are touching upon.
It is interesting that at various times I have tried to go along to some meetings that would be called left wing, although I do not use that term. One time when I went to an international socialist meeting at the workingmen's club, they got most embarrassed. There were only about four or five people there. I was interested in their viewpoints. One of the gentlemen asked one of the women to go outside for a minute. They had a bit of a whisper and came back in. They looked a little bit worried and did not know quite what to do. Finally, the fellow came over and asked me to leave. This was a public meeting. I thought it was a very interesting viewpoint. It is similar to the Fabian socialist meeting that the Labor Party put on. They did not ask me to leave; they were not even going to let me come along. That was yet another supposed public meeting. So we wonder about the view - - -
Mrs Grassby: No, it was by invitation. It was not public.
MR STEVENSON: Mrs Grassby was the first one I saw when I moved in the door. She was filling out the cheque for $60 for her and Al, and she looked up and she said, "What are you doing here?". I said, "Well, I wanted to come along to the meeting".
Mrs Grassby: It was by invitation. You were not asked.
MR STEVENSON: I know that I was not asked. The unfortunate thing - I am sure that they have corrected it - is that you put out a document inviting people along. It said that it was a public meeting. It said, "All welcome".
Mrs Grassby: It did not say that it was a public meeting. It said, "All welcome in the Labor Party". You were not welcome. You were not in the Labor Party.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .