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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 5 Hansard (8 May) . . Page.. 1291 ..

MR HUMPHRIES: She did not speak to Ms Dundas' amendment at all, as I recall.

Ms Tucker: No, but I did not say I would not. I was talking about the general issues, which could have been relevant to Ms Dundas' amendment.

MR SPEAKER: Order! Let us settle the argument. You can speak to the amendment, if you wish. That is the question before the house. But if you want to speak to something else, later on, you will have to seek leave. That is the point I am making.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, I do not wish to speak to the amendment and, therefore, I will sit down.

MR SPEAKER: Thank you, Mr Humphries.

MR STANHOPE (Chief Minister, Attorney-General, Minister for Health, Minister for Community Affairs and Minister for Women) (11.48): Mr Speaker, it is most appropriate for the ACT to call upon the Commonwealth government to accept a reference of power to enable partners-regardless of their sex-who have been living in a domestic relationship, to access basic principles of justice and fairness in relation to their property. This would accord with general legal principles that apply in the common law. It just means it will be more accessible, on similar terms to those applying to married couples under the Commonwealth Family Law Act.

The Commonwealth is happy to apply these principles to couples who live in a heterosexual relationship, but not to same-sex couples. It is a property matter governed by attitudes to sex.

Mr Humphries: On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I am sorry to interrupt the Attorney-General, but it does seem to me that the Attorney-General was speaking about the substantive motion, not about the amendment, which you have ruled we need to speak on if we speak at this time.

MR SPEAKER: If you want to attack the Attorney-General on the relevance question, you might try to do that. However, going back to the issue I raised with you earlier, I was just trying to help you understand that you were throwing away an opportunity and that, if you want to speak again, you will have to seek leave. No more than that. I am sorry I used too much-

Mr Hargreaves: He can do both-as long as he is addressing the amendment.

MR SPEAKER: You can speak on both-not just one. Mr Stanhope is speaking to the question that Ms Dundas' amendment be agreed to.

MR STANHOPE: Mr Speaker, I note the amendment Ms Dundas has circulated to the substantive motion. Whilst I understand very clearly the importance of the motion, I have a range of concerns about it. I propose to go into some detail on that in a moment.

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