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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 10 Hansard (23 September) . . Page.. 3097 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

The other interesting thing coming out of this legislation, Mr Speaker, is the ability to investigate a disaster. Previously, the coroner has been able to investigate either a death or a fire, but not a disaster. To use a case in point, if the Royal Canberra Hospital disaster had not actually caused a death, even though it had caused severe injury, there is some doubt as to whether the coroner would have been able to investigate it. Under the new legislation, there is no doubt that he would be able to investigate it.

There is some irony here. In his introductory speech - as I recall, it was in June, certainly before the Royal Canberra Hospital implosion disaster occurred - Gary Humphries said:

An inquiry into a `disaster' would be undertaken only at the request or with the consent of the Attorney-General.

It is not expected that this jurisdiction will be much used - we have few `disasters' in the Territory - but, where it is used, the public investigation of such occurrences should benefit the administration of the Territory.

The irony of that sentence, I guess, is not to be missed. So, it is a timely approach, considering the circumstances that have occurred since this legislation was tabled. In conclusion, Mr Speaker, it is an important tidy-up. There are some extra powers for the coroner. I see them as positive. I congratulate the Attorney-General for dealing with this issue in this way.

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General) (11.26), in reply: Mr Speaker, I want to thank Mr Wood and Mr Moore for their support for this Bill. I am glad that they are supportive of the Bill. It is the product of a very extensive process of public discussion and consultation, particularly with Canberra's ethnic community, to establish ways in which the coroner's jurisdiction can be made more relevant and more helpful for people in the severe trauma of the loss of a life, for example. The legislation was, I think, in some urgent need of reform. It was something like 40 years old. For that reason, the changes have been fairly extensive.

However, Mr Speaker, I think with the passage of these two Bills today we have quite comprehensive legislation that will ensure that those who are in need of the coroner's jurisdiction will find in that jurisdiction a contemporary and valuable source of assistance for problems that might arise. In particular, the capacity of the Coroners Court to quickly identify relevant issues and address those in the appropriate way is enhanced by the legislation. The capacity of the cultural sensitivities of families of those that have died to be taken into account in coronial proceedings is also enhanced by these amendments. I think that the community will notice that as they go about the use of these provisions.

Mr Speaker, I was asked by Mr Wood when he spoke to this Bill to indicate a timetable for the hospital implosion coronial inquiry. That inquiry, of course, is completely outside the hands of the Government. It is within the jurisdiction of the court. I cannot provide information about that; but I will attempt to obtain information from the court,

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