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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 6 Hansard (17 June) . . Page.. 1695 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

This particular piece of legislation is about establishing a council to try to understand these matters more and perhaps come up with sensible administrative recommendations and even legislative recommendations to improve such situations. It is a sad thing, I believe, that there is such widespread domestic violence in our society. It is a wonderful thing that we have at least recognised it in the last few years and tried to do something about it. I often comment to people who wistfully look back to the supposed good old days of 30 and 40 years ago when such things were suppressed. They probably were the good old days for white middle-class males, but it is important for us to look back and say, "Was it really so good for other people in society?".

They are the sorts of reasons why we need to show leadership in this area of domestic violence. We have done so. One of the great contributions that Rosemary Follett made to this Assembly and to this community was in leading Australia in this kind of work. It is important that the model we establish will deliver the best possible results. That is why I am happy to adjourn this debate and discuss with other members the best way to deliver what the Community Law Reform Committee has recommended.

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General) (5.54), in reply: I think members are supporting the general thrust of the legislation, the establishment of the Domestic Violence Prevention Council and the other provisions that appear in this legislation. I thank them for that support. Mr Moore is right to say that the incidence of domestic violence in our society is too large, is too great, and that we need to take active steps to wind back the view taken by some people that they can solve problems within domestic relationships by resorting to violence.

I am very willing to acknowledge the work that we picked up from the former Government in the area of domestic violence and very proud to be able to carry that forward and take further steps to implement important measures that will, I hope, change the culture in some relationships, in some families, and change the expectation in the broader community about the way in which such incidents, when they come to public attention, are dealt with in an effective way.

I think it is important to note that this is not a debate about whether we should deal with domestic violence more effectively. It is simply a debate about how we do that. The debate is centred around the position of domestic violence project coordinator which the CLRC has recommended be established and which the Government, in its response to the CLRC report, indicated ought not to be established, at least at this point, pending the establishment of the Domestic Violence Prevention Council and the establishment of a subcommittee of that council to examine the way in which such a position would work in respect of the general tasks that are outlined in the CLRC report.

Mr Wood: It is mapped out in the report. The report maps out how the position should work.

MR HUMPHRIES: It does so to some extent, but it also leaves a number of issues to the Domestic Violence Prevention Council to determine. In particular, adoption of the Duluth model is an issue which is not fully mapped out in the CLRC report and, in my view, does need to be worked through in a way which leaves as much as possible a clean slate for the Domestic Violence Prevention Council to deal with in its work.

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