Page 1227 - Week 05 - Tuesday, 11 May 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Madam Speaker, much was heard earlier on today about consultation engaged in by this Government - the process of talking to the people of Canberra, listening to them, finding out what they want and then acting accordingly. This Bill tonight is a good example of what garbage that rhetoric earlier today really was. This Bill is a good example of what you should not do if you are a serious government hoping to implement major reforms, what you should not do if you want to see those reforms achieved.
Mr Berry: Another election promise and we deliver again.
MR HUMPHRIES: You are not going to deliver tonight, Mr Berry. That is my message to you. In my view, you are not going to deliver tonight. I want to take the presentation speech that the Minister delivered to the Assembly. It is a good example of what is wrong with this Bill. Here we have a very short speech, just over two pages of very large type, in which the Minister started by saying:
I move:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
Fair enough so far. He went on:
Madam Speaker, the Bill establishes controls over amateur and professional boxing similar to those applicable in New South Wales.
Fair enough. He stated what the Bill was all about, and then went on to describe in succeeding paragraphs what the Bill actually does. He said:
... boxing ... allowed only under the auspices ... of the Amateur Boxing Union of Australia. Professional fist boxing ... allowed only under codes of practice ... Kick boxing and similar contests are effectively banned under this Bill.
He gave a very descriptive account of what the Bill is all about. If I am not mistaken, Madam Speaker, this is a major piece of legislation changing the nature of the sport of boxing in the ACT and also affecting other sports in the ACT in a very dramatic fashion - kick boxing, for example. The Minister shakes his head. I am a bit surprised about that. I think the Bill affects kick boxing fairly dramatically, but we can argue about that at some other time.
The point is that in this presentation speech there is not a word of rationale as to why the Government is doing what it is, not a word to persuade people who are not as familiar with the issues as perhaps people in this chamber might be as to why this Government is going down this path. I have the advantage of being a former Minister for Health. I know about the arguments to do with boxing, and I do not need much convincing that boxing should be controlled in this country, if not even banned. There is an argument for that. But I hear nothing in these words of the Minister to persuade me, if I were an uninformed person, that the steps this Government is taking are the steps that should be taken. That is not conducive to persuading the people you are talking to and communicating with to the point of view that you want them to reach.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .