Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 11 Hansard (25 September) . . Page.. 3415 ..

MR OSBORNE (continuing):

Yet I received legal advice from the Government Solicitor that I was unable to do it because of the self-government Act. I was surprised when no-one seemed to kick up a stink about that. Euthanasia is a much bigger issue and it affects the rest of the country. As we have seen, people have travelled to the Northern Territory because it is legal up there. I think it is certainly worth arguing. I am then left with the question of what is more important to me - my role as a politician or beliefs which I hold very dear and which I said I would always maintain during my career in politics.

Mr Speaker, I do not intend to call a vote on this issue. An issue like euthanasia is something that I am very passionate about. It is something that goes to the core of my Christian beliefs, and I have always said that I remain that first and anything else second. I felt it important that I stand and raise some points that I find very relevant. I certainly will not be making another comment about this publicly. I am quite happy for other members of the Assembly to have a go at me about it; but, as far as I am concerned, I have to live with myself. I have things that I am passionate about and I will not bend on. Mr Speaker, I certainly do not want anyone to read into this that I am going contrary to my role as a politician in this house. However, I have to look at myself in the mirror and I have to be satisfied that I have been true to what I believe in.

I do not think I have said anything one way or the other, Mr Speaker. However, there were some points that I wanted to raise and to get out. As I said, this has been a very hard one for me. Irrespective of whatever job I do, whether it be a footballer, a policeman or a politician, I spent too many years in the wilderness, for want of a better term, Mr Speaker, to compromise something that is very dear to me now. If Mr Andrews's piece of legislation gets up, well, it gets up. If it does not, it does not. It is very important to me as a person that I stay true to what I believe in. I will not be compromised on some core issues, and euthanasia is one of them.

MR WOOD (5.17): Mr Speaker, the report that Ms Follett has brought to our attention is a report of the Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills and it contains statements of fact - the interpretation of what the outcome of a piece of legislation would be. Undeniably, that legislation would diminish the role of the ACT Legislative Assembly and of two other Territories. The question of euthanasia is another debate. Whether the measure proposed by Mr Andrews is justified or not is another debate. I rose to make those points very clear.

MR STEFANIAK (Minister for Education and Training) (5.18): It is a difficult question, Mr Speaker, as Mr Osborne said. However, I think the speakers in favour of the motion are quite right. They are two separate issues. When Mr Moore brought up his euthanasia Bill on the last occasion I voted against it. When he does it again I will vote against it again. But that is a matter for this Assembly. The issue here is far more fundamental than that. It goes right to the very nature of what we are doing here, and what we are doing here as a Legislative Assembly. I think that is the fundamental question. It is not what the subject of the Bill is; it is the principle of what this Assembly is all about, why we were created, and what we are expected to do. If this Bill gets up in the Federal Parliament it goes against what this Assembly was created for and what we are meant to do. It does affect our ability to make laws. It could be the thin edge of the sword, as other members have said. I think that is the fundamental question here.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .