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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 9 Hansard (31 August) . . Page.. 2634 ..

MR STANHOPE (continuing):

committee to address the issue of burden of proof. There is a detailed discussion of the issue which I found very interesting and very useful, and I applaud the fact that the scrutiny of Bills committee is providing the Assembly with a detailed analysis of issues such as this.

The scrutiny of Bills committee, in relation to the issue as it applies to the Liquor (Amendment) Bill, does not make a particular recommendation. It draws the question of the burden of proof to the Legislative Assembly for its information and invites a response from the Executive. I would like to echo that invitation and I look forward to the Attorney's response to this paper on the burden of proof. It is specific to the Liquor (Amendment) Bill to some extent. It raises the question of the burden of proof. It does raise a doubt about on whom the burden of proof would fall in relation to a prosecution under the Liquor (Amendment) Bill. Whilst it does not answer that question, it is noteworthy that the question was raised and, it having been raised, I think this is a useful area of discussion. I will not pursue it now, other than to say there is an issue there.

The scrutiny of Bills committee, in relation to this piece of legislation, said that there were arguments either way in relation to how the burden of proof would be applied in relation to offences under 93F of the Liquor Act, and I would think it useful if the Government was prepared to respond to the issue, broadly or generally, having now been invited to do so. The Labor Party is pleased to support the Bill.

MS TUCKER (4.28): Yes, the Greens also are happy to support further regulation in respect of under-age drinking as we understand that it is still a problem on licensed premises. This legislation is aiming to address this issue, and the tightening of the definition of a responsible adult would also be useful. It is important that indoor occupancy loadings use similar criteria to those for outdoors, especially in regard to the adequacy of toilet facilities. Fire security is paramount to the safety of patrons as well, and the recommendation of the Fire Commissioner is important.

We are supportive of this legislation because, as I said, we want to ensure that licensees are responsible in their service practices. We have had discussion about it before in this place. I would have to make the comment, though, that generally, across society, there is still an impression given by adults in the community that getting drunk is pretty well okay. While we can support legislation such as this, I think we all have to take the responsibility as well, as adults in the community, of presenting a role model, if you like, which is consistent with what the rhetoric is from people who are concerned about young people and under-age drinking.

I notice in the media that there is always a sort of shocked reaction when figures who are idols of young people are found culpable of any kind of substance abuse, but I still believe that the underlying messages - you can see it in the advertising that is used for alcohol - that are still being given by society to young people are that this is a drug that is basically okay and acceptable, unlike perhaps other drugs such as marijuana, heroin or other addictive substances such as cigarettes. These other substances are unequally given attention, to show the evils of them. Alcohol, in fact, as we all know, is responsible for huge health issues in the Australian community. The advertising and the

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