Page 2895 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 14 September 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Kaine: They do not have Marxist governments there.
MR HUMPHRIES: They, indeed, do not have Marxist governments there, and I think we can say, with some certainty, that it has not been a dangerous first step in those places. I therefore, as I indicated, will support the legislation.
MADAM SPEAKER: I call Mr Cornwell.
Mr Lamont: I was going to seek leave to speak again just to thank Mr Humphries for acknowledging that we will win the next election.
MADAM SPEAKER: Order!
MR CORNWELL (11.58): I just briefly wish to join this debate. I think it is important to state one's position on the matter. I regard Mr Moore as a zealot, who I think is determined to change the social mores of ACT society.
Mr Kaine: All by himself.
MR CORNWELL: Indeed, selectively and progressively, of course, whatever those terms mean. They mean different things, I suggest, to Mr Moore than to me. However, at least that is Mr Moore's position. He has, in this particular issue, been joined by the social engineers on the other side of the house, the Labor Party, who have a mania, it seems to me, to nail down every human condition and control it - ironically, in this case, even death.
I accept that there are practices that go on at the moment in our hospitals that may not be legally regulated, and that these may be of some concern to some people. Nevertheless, they have been going on, if I can use the word, successfully; but I would not like that to be misconstrued. They have been going on for many years. I am by no means convinced, as one of the earlier speakers said, that this legislation would allow those activities to be codified and to work perfectly. If they are to work perfectly, why do we have before us 26 amendments to this piece of legislation? It seems to me that we have not really achieved even what Mr Moore and the social engineers opposite are trying to put up, when we have a piece of legislation that has now attracted 26 amendments, and something like 22 of them are coming from the Government. I would suggest that all we have done, far from ensuring that this is going to work perfectly, is simply given another area of litigation for the lawyers to argue over and to make money from.
Mr Kaine, quite rightly, made a number of very telling points. Like him, I believe that this legislation, if passed, would be a foot in the door for something much further down the track in terms of voluntary euthanasia. I also accept his comment about people acting in good faith; but, if I could reverse Mr Kaine's comments, are you suggesting that the activities of the people in the hospitals now are not in good faith? Again, do we have to legalise people acting in good faith? I think that is an insult to the people who are carrying out duties at the moment, unpalatable though some may be.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .