Page 3347 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 12 October 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
oblique sort of reference. I think all in this place would know of families where that has happened in the past, and it will continue to happen in the future. I think that is the sort of instance where a review of the law of this kind is going to prove invaluable, given the legislation proceeding. These sorts of proposals simply must offer better outcomes than under the current law.
As Mr Humphries said earlier, there are some instances where people can be counselled to create contracts prior to marriage or prior to any particular type of domestic relationship. I think the Chief Minister made reference to that subject as well. That can be seen as confrontationist in some instances between individuals. I think we would all reflect fairly carefully on family instances where one would never imagine that a contract would be needed in the first place. You go into these sorts of relationships or arrangements with the very best of intent in mind. You cannot, at that point, foresee the difficulties that may arise.
Another perfect example which is quoted in this discussion paper and which I have personal experience of in the past in Canberra is where elderly parents, particularly widowed elderly parents, come to the ACT after selling their home elsewhere and settle into a domestic relationship with extended family here. As instanced in this paper, a granny flat or similar is built with money from the older person's capital and, lo and behold, the unpredicted thing happens - a family breakdown occurs. When there is no legal status already created by form of contract or other arrangement, some of the most unfortunate and terrible examples of family breakdown can be exacerbated by the attempt by that family to settle that arrangement. These examples in this discussion paper are going to be addressed.
We cannot blame those individuals for not entering into contractual arrangements in the first place because, in all honesty, they imagined that they would not need them. As I said a moment ago, those sorts of things, particularly within family and relative circumstances, are done with the best of intent, but unfortunately things go wrong. Other members of the family come into the play and, before you know it, there is a dispute. Under the current provisions of the law, it is very difficult for the people in those circumstances to reach some easy and cost-effective outcome to that sort of dispute. I believe that the proposals in this discussion paper are going to prove invaluable in those cases. There is no question that de facto and homosexual relationships are important, but there are many others that appear at the moment to be more oblique or less obvious. I think that is where this sort of discussion paper is going to be of benefit. I join with other members in commending the general thrust of this discussion paper to the Assembly, and I look forward to the resultant legislation.
MR CONNOLLY (Attorney-General, Minister for Housing and Community Services and Minister for Urban Services) (8.48), in reply: I thank members for their general support for this discussion paper and the legislation that is foreshadowed. I am able to advise members that, by and large, the general support for the legislation indicated in this place is mirrored in the response we have had to date from the community on this paper. The 15 or so substantive submissions that we have had have all been supportive. There is a major submission from the Law Society which supports the legislation in principle and raises a few technical points, most of which I would hope to be in a position to address when the legislation is brought before the Assembly. Given that general support for the legislation, both in the community and here, I would hope that we
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .