Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 8 Hansard (31 August) . . Page.. 2790 ..
(i) the other substitute parent freely, and with a full understanding of what is involved, agrees to the making of the order in favour of the applicant substitute parent; or
(ii) the applicant substitute parent is unable to contact the other substitute parent to obtain his or her agreement under subparagraph (i);
(d) whether payment or reward (other than for expenses reasonably incurred) has been given or received by either of the child's substitute parents, or either of the child's birth parents, for or in consideration of-
(i) the making of the order; or
(ii) the agreement required under paragraph (1) (b); or
(iii) the handing over of the child to the substitute parents; or
(iv) the making of any arrangements with a view to the making of the order;
(e) whether the court is satisfied that both birth parents and both substitute parents have received appropriate counselling and assessment from a counselling service that is not connected with the doctor who carried out the procedure that resulted in the birth of the child or the institution where the procedure was carried out.
'(2B) â The Supreme Court may take into consideration any other relevant matter.".
These amendments recast section 11, with two primary considerations being paramount. My amendment No 1 provides that the best interests of the child, as well as the agreement of both parents, must be considered by the Supreme Court in making a parentage order in the case of a surrogacy. It is important that the best interests of the child should be the foremost consideration. Making those two aspects non-negotiable, in my view, is very important.
My amendment No 2 is consequential, arising out of the change in focus effected by amendment No 1. The intent of my amendments is not to change the thrust of the legislation but merely to change the focus to two key elements.
Amendment No 3 retains the rest of the matters in section 11 that the Supreme Court ought to take into consideration in determining an application for a parentage order. It also includes "any other relevant matter" so that the Supreme Court is not restricted.
These amendments will not presume that one set of potential parents for a child should be favoured over the other. The paramount consideration is the best interests of the child. With the agreement of the parents concerned, the order can then be made, subject to the criteria outlined in my amendment No 3.
I note that Mr Stanhope has circulated amendments to my three amendments. I will talk to them at the appropriate time. I commend my amendments.
MR STANHOPE (Leader of the Opposition) (5.48): I seek leave to move amendments Nos 1, 2 and 3 to Mr Rugendyke's amendments Nos 1 and 3, circulated in my name on the buff sheet, together.
Leave granted.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .