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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 7 Hansard (26 June) . . Page.. 2282 ..

MR WOOD (continuing):

The Minister has heard this debate before. It has been raised a number of times here and in the Estimates Committee. I believe it has been a money-saving decision that has placed the coordinator of VOCAL into the Domestic Violence Prevention Council, proposed as chair, and to do some of that work. I think that is a move that will be to the detriment of the work of VOCAL, and certainly to the detriment of the Domestic Violence Prevention Council.

I congratulate the Minister for establishing the council. It was a good recommendation from a very lengthy and long-considered report, and it is proper and wise that this is being done. I would point out to the Minister - I think, in answer to his not very strong argument - that he has accepted the recommendation to establish the council. That was one of the recommendations of the Community Law Reform Committee. Another of those recommendations was to establish the position of coordinator. But Mr Humphries has argued in this chamber that it should be the council that will tell him what to do on this matter. "Let us hear from the council on it", he said. Why will he accept one key recommendation, the establishment of the council, but not the other key recommendation, the establishment of the position of that person who is going to see that it all works together? I do not understand his logic. I think it is faulty and it is a rationale because he did not want to provide the money to establish the position. With recent changes, we are moving to a better position in respect of combating domestic violence, and I think these amendments are a key to making sure they all work.

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General) (9.33): Mr Speaker, I indicate our opposition to these amendments. The arguments that I put in respect of them are the same as those I put on the last occasion on which we debated this - I think last Tuesday - and on a number of other occasions. I do not propose to regurgitate them all for the edification of people who were here on previous occasions.

I will simply emphasise, Mr Speaker, that I think it is most unfortunate that the Assembly, with this Bill, chooses to proceed with a structure which is different from that which has been proposed. It results in the Assembly having to put in place a regime which loses the opportunity for the Victims of Crime Coordinator to play a pivotal role as the chair of the council, and also play that role in respect of her other role as Victims of Crime Coordinator. It is not the case, as Mr Wood implied, that the Victims of Crime Coordinator belongs to VOCAL. She works with VOCAL, but she does not come from VOCAL. She is a separate statutory office, quite apart from VOCAL. The person occupying that position at the moment happens to have very considerable expertise in this field, and would have made a very good chair of the council. I think it is most regrettable, Mr Speaker, that these actions are being imposed in this way.

Mr Speaker, I also think it is unfortunate that members have chosen to put to one side the arguments about Commonwealth funding, which I put to members or which was put to members via some discussions that took place on this subject. It means that the possibility of collecting Commonwealth money to fund this position is gone. I can assure Mr Wood that it does mean that that is the case. It does mean that that is the case, categorically. Money for that position now has to be found from somewhere else,

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