Page 1246 - Week 05 - Tuesday, 11 May 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Boxing is unique amongst sporting activities in that the ultimate aim is for victory to be obtained by inflicting on the opponent such a measure of physical injury that he or she is unable to continue. This is the only sport where this is the case. Because this is so, many people now advocate that boxing should be banned - your AMA friends would support that view, Mrs Carnell - or, if this is not possible, that young people should be discouraged by educational campaigns from taking up this sport. That is fair enough. Others support boxing as a virile training in self-defence or as a healthy outlet for human aggression, and point to its worldwide popularity as a participant and spectator sport.
The Government actually considers that interest in this sport is declining, and I would point to the world amateur boxing championships conducted in Sydney in December 1991 at which entries were down, crowds were poor and even the finals were fought in a largely empty stadium - and rightly so. It is, however, a noteworthy and important consideration that boxing remains an Olympic and Commonwealth Games sport. If it were not for that fact it would not have the level of support that it does throughout the community. Boxing supporters therefore press for rational controls designed to minimise the risks of serious injury to the participants. That is why Labor supported the introduction of regulation of boxing. We promised it in our election campaign and we are now delivering. We are quite proud to do so.
In the Australian Capital Territory the issue of boxing control was brought to a head by the presence of a boxing tent at the Royal Canberra Show in 1990 and by a subsequent article in the Canberra Times accompanied by photographs of participants, some of whom were under 15 years of age. An inspection of the activity at the show revealed that ring facilities were inadequate; there was no medical practitioner in immediate attendance, if available at all; some of the boxers belonging to the tent were underage for employment purposes; and there was no proper check on the health, sickness or competency of participants invited into the ring from amongst the show's patrons.
A large number of representations about the boxing tent were received from the general public, the local boxing industry, the Australian Medical Association, the Amateur Boxing Union of Australia and the Australian Commonwealth Games Association. These representations expressed outrage at the age of participants, the fact that the tent was in the open and there were no spectator age restrictions, the call for the immediate banning of boxing, and the call for regulation of boxing to ensure the health and safety of those involved in the sport. A search of legislation revealed that there were no appropriate measures in place for the control of this activity. The Royal Canberra Show Society was requested to not permit further boxing tents and, to its credit, has agreed.
Mr Cornwell: Defend your kick boxing arguments. Never mind about this. We are not arguing with that.
MR BERRY: I will get to that, old fellow; just sit down and wait. This left the decision as to how to proceed generally with the question of boxing control. In its 1986 report "Health Aspects of Boxing", the National Health and Medical Research Council agreed with the recommendation of a 1984 British Medical Association report that boxing be banned. However, in the same report the council recommended that, whilst boxing is allowed to continue, urgent attention should be given to upgrading of the control of boxing, with appropriate
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .