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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 8 Hansard (29 August) . . Page.. 2588 ..

Amendment negatived.

MR STANHOPE (Leader of the Opposition) (5.43): I move:

We also discussed this amendment in the broad. I think this is a proposition that should be supported. This amendment provides that a search of a person, namely a frisk search, needs to be conducted by an authorised officer of the opposite sex to the person being searched.

Mr Hargreaves: The same sex.

MR STANHOPE: Of the same sex. I am sorry. It requires that the search be by an authorised officer not of the opposite but of the same sex. The amendment is designed to ensure that a police officer responsible for the search will ensure that the appropriate police regulations and guidelines governing searches apply. I think I did raise and talk to this point when I spoke to the amendments more broadly earlier. I believe that a frisk search of a person entering a sporting venue should not be undertaken lightly. That is why I think this is a significant and invasive process we are legislating here.

A frisk search is invasive and should be undertaken only on the basis of a reasonable belief of its necessity. It should be undertaken only by a police officer or a police officer should be responsible and should accept responsibility for the search and the way in which it is conducted. As I said before, if people are to be searched in this way at the soccer, then it is only appropriate that a person of the same gender conduct the search.

MR HUMPHRIES (Treasurer, Attorney-General and Minister for Justice and Community Safety) (5.45): It is the government's view that frisk searches should be conducted by people of the same sex as the person being searched. I am told that the police, as a matter of standard practice, conduct such searches only in that way, and I am told that Olympic volunteers, police and others involved in this exercise have been strictly trained in those terms.

We come back to this issue about whether it is police or authorised persons. That is the other change being made by this amendment. For the reasons I have already indicated, I oppose that change. Although I do not support putting this amendment in place, it will certainly be honoured with respect to ensuring that only a person of the same sex as a person being searched conducts a search.

Amendment negatived.

Clause 10 agreed to.

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