Page 1358 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 12 May 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Religious Intolerance
MR CONNOLLY: Yesterday Mr Stevenson asked me whether there had been any consultation in relation to ratifying or implementing the United Nations declaration on the elimination of religious intolerance, and I undertook to take that on notice. The United Nations declaration on religious intolerance was a resolution of the General Assembly of the United Nations passed on 25 November 1981. It is a mere resolution of the Assembly; it is not a treaty, so the formal treaty consultation processes do not apply. However, in March of last year the Commonwealth Attorney wrote to every State Attorney indicating that it was the Commonwealth's intention to declare the religious declaration, which Australia had voted for, to be an international instrument relating to human rights and fundamental freedoms for the purposes of the Commonwealth Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986. The effect of declaring it to be such an instrument is to extend the reporting functions of CHREOC to the rights recognised in the instrument. The Commonwealth invited the ACT to raise any objections to that course of action and I responded on 8 April 1992 saying that we had no objections to the Commonwealth's proposed course of action.
Mr Stevenson: But you did not know about it yesterday when I asked.
MR CONNOLLY: Madam Speaker, Mr Stevenson makes an inane and snide interjection that I did not know about it yesterday when he asked. Mr Stevenson, when anyone holds ministerial office - I am sure that those opposite who have held ministerial office would endorse this - if your recollection of a letter that you may have signed 12 months ago is not crystal clear, a sensible and prudent Minister says, "I will take that matter on notice and get back to you", rather than chancing your arm by saying what may or may not be a correct recollection and potentially misleading the house.
Madam Speaker, what I did yesterday when Mr Stevenson asked the question was to take it on notice, quickly find the answer and get back to him. To say snidely, "But you did not know that yesterday", Mr Stevenson, merely displays your lack of understanding of appropriate parliamentary procedure. I am sure that no member opposite when they were a Minister, no matter what vague recollection they may have had of a piece of paper they signed 12 months ago, would not have checked before answering. That is what I do. That is what most Ministers in most parliaments do.
PAPERS
MR BERRY (Deputy Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, for the information of members, I present, pursuant to the Drugs of Dependence Act 1989, the revised version of the 1991-92 report on the operation of the Act. This report was originally presented on 24 March 1993. Due to an oversight, the final page was not included in the original report.
For the information of members, I present the ACT Government Service quarterly staffing analyses for September 1992-93 and December 1992-93.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .