Page 2361 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 22 June 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MADAM SPEAKER: You could behave in a decorous manner, Mr Stevenson.
MR STEVENSON: I always do, when it is deserved.
MADAM SPEAKER: Mr Stevenson, I will brook no further argument. Either you will speak to the point that has been put forward to you or you will not.
MR STEVENSON: I am only too happy to. Let me make the point clearly. On page 21 there is a definition of "designated group". If the definition did not apply to anything, one would not need to talk to the definition. If it does apply to something, perhaps it is relevant to talk about that to which it applies. That seems logical. What it actually applies to is page 22, as Mr Moore quite correctly pointed out.
Mr Kaine: Very erudite.
MR STEVENSON: Yes, in an erudite manner. It is only reasonable that I do that. I have a major concern that I will go into outside this Assembly later on. As I was saying some time ago, my concern is that this situation can be used to discriminate. I do not agree with discrimination against these groups.
Let me, in the short time left, make a couple of points. The clause talks about impairment. There is a better way. I was about to talk about solutions before the Chief Minister interrupted. A better solution is to make training available. Laurie Brereton's suggestions, which are currently being drafted in the Federal industrial relations area, are excellent. To allow those people who are impaired to be paid for the degree of work they are able to produce would give them an opportunity to increase their efficiency in that area. I would welcome answers to the questions I have raised.
MR HUMPHRIES (3.56): Mr Stevenson has raised a significant question of philosophy to do with the role of discrimination in one form or another in legislation such as this. This is a complex issue that we have discussed before and we should not go into it in much detail today. Let me say simply that, in a sense, he is right to say that to discriminate in favour of one group is to discriminate against another group. But it is also possible to say that, where one seeks to advantage a clearly disadvantaged group within the community, where that group is of a particular character, it is appropriate to consider at least the option of furthering that particular group's interests by some form of discrimination.
I do not wish to make that a principle that is so broad as to be held against me later; but we do have working already within the ACT public service a number of programs designed to advantage people who come from backgrounds which present a disability to them, be they Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islanders, be they persons with physical or mental disabilities, be they persons from non-English-speaking backgrounds. All those people, we can and we should accept, have a certain demand on our assistance, and the kinds of programs that are in operation now, which have had the support of members of this chamber in other contexts, should be allowed to continue, I believe.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .