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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 2 Hansard (27 February) . . Page.. 622 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

with animals. I do not wish to turn the stomachs of members who have not had dinner yet, but I very much doubt whether that kind of activity would be covered in subsection (3). It does not display genitalia, necessarily, or include sexual intercourse within the meaning of section 92 of the Crimes Act.

I think we would all agree that, with entertainment of that kind, not necessarily in Civic but in areas of the Territory close to schools or residential accommodation, it would be appropriate for the Government to move quickly against its happening, particularly in circumstances where the safety net is there for the Government to bring forward regulations in this place and lay them on the table, with or without a statement by me. They have to be laid on the table in this place and members have the right to disallow them - not just to disallow them in total but to amend them if they feel that I have the thing basically right but it could do with a bit of improvement. That is the safeguard; that is the protection. I as Attorney-General, and any successor of mine, have to lay these things before the Assembly and the Assembly can make a decision about these matters.

We attempted to discourage this particular organisation that is now in Civic from opening up. We said to them, "This is not the appropriate thing". We attempted to use provisions in the planning legislation to prevent it from happening. We found that we could not. We attempted to discourage them and we were not able to do that. It is appropriate to have the power to deal with a situation like that. I say to members: Do not believe that every situation can be dealt with in such a way that you can come back and get the Assembly to ratify it. It could be months and months before that can be effected.

Mr Whitecross: Two weeks? You introduced it last week.

MR HUMPHRIES: No; we do not sit for two months sometimes. We do not sit for two months on some occasions, Mr Whitecross. Do you remember the summer holidays? Mr Speaker, I have asked members not to put us in the position where we do not have that power and it might just be necessary and quite appropriate to exercise it.

MR WOOD (6.46): The Opposition will be supporting this amendment, but we will nevertheless be voting against Mr Humphries's Bill. The logic attached to that is that the amendment makes the Bill marginally less problematic than it is at the moment. I repeat that it would be our preference for the matter to be adjourned so that some greater consideration could be given to this.

Amendment negatived.

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General) (6.46): I move:

Page 2, line 19, clause 5, omit "30 September 1997", substitute "30 June 1997".

This amendment brings the end of the trial back to the end of this financial year. I hope the report of the consultants can be provided to the Assembly and we will have time to consider whether we wish to implement it or not or whether to accept its recommendations or not. Although that is a bit tight, I think we can accommodate it, and I would urge members to support that amendment.

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