Page 3444 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 13 October 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Humphries's proposal would mean that where there is a plea of guilty, or an indication of a plea of guilty, which, of course, may change or may not necessarily be accepted by a court, the process could start earlier. That may mean some pre-sentence reports being compiled unnecessarily, but we will see how it works. If, as I believe, it gets passed, it may be that the suggestions of the Law Society are valid. On balance, although it was close, we do not favour supporting this amendment. I accept that, if it is the will of the Assembly, it could well work.
MR MOORE (4.06): It may well be the will of the Assembly, Madam Speaker. I think Mr Humphries's amendment puts a little more faith in the courts. The proposed section does say that if a court finds a person guilty "it may", and then goes on to deal with the same thing. The court still has the choice over the situation that Mr Humphries proposes. It seems to me an eminently sensible proposal that Mr Humphries has put into this amendment, and I will be supporting it.
MR STEVENSON (4.06): Yes, I also support the amendment. It seems that we should take the advice of the Law Society here. It is unfortunate in this case, perhaps, that the Attorney-General did not see fit to do the same.
Amendment agreed to.
MR CONNOLLY (Attorney-General, Minister for Housing and Community Services and Minister for Urban Services) (4.07): I move:
Page 9, line 17, proposed paragraph 455(1)(b), insert "(including cultural background)" after "background".
This amendment relates to some consultation that we got back on the issue of what should be involved in pre-sentence reports. There has been a strong view that that should include issues such as cultural background. While we accept that everyone is equal before the law, cultural background is a relevant factor in the pre-sentence report. For that reason we agree with the community view that that should be included.
MR HUMPHRIES (4.07), by leave: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and thank you, members. This amendment simply refines a reference to the social history and background of the offender as a factor which should be taken into account when a pre-sentence report is being given. I think it is important to state an important distinction to be made here. It is not the intention of the Assembly, I believe, that the mere fact that a person comes from a particular cultural background should be a relevant factor in the sentencing of that person. What is relevant is the extent to which their cultural background might be relevant to the sentence which could be imposed upon them. There is a very fine distinction there, but I think it is worth making.
The suggestion for this change was made by the Chief Minister's Aboriginal Advisory Council. It was concerned about the position of Aboriginal people before the courts. I do not think the effect of this amendment would be that Aboriginal people were to be treated any differently from other people, and Ms Szuty made that point; but that, if there were particular elements of their Aboriginality which were relevant to that sentence or to that offence, then they could be taken into account. I think that is an acceptable position to take. For that reason we will be supporting the amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .