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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 5 Hansard (8 May) . . Page.. 1717 ..

MR WOOD (continuing):

These provisions generated a great deal of comment in the consultation process. Submissions suggested a range of approaches. Some submissions expressed the view that transgender people should simply use the facilities appropriate to their gender identification or alternatively, with which they felt most comfortable.

Other submissions expressed the view that there should be a distinction between "temporary"and "permanent"gender identification. Of these submissions, there was a general concern about ulterior motives.

I would like to say that it is disappointing that a number of people seemed to assume that transgender people are more likely to engage in predatory behaviour than anyone else. I think that this quite clearly demonstrates the need for additional anti-discrimination education in our community.

Across all submissions, there was a general level of concern for the safety and privacy of all users of such facilities.

The Government will be repealing these provisions primarily because they are outdated and no longer appropriate. These are the only provisions of this kind in ACT legislation-there are no equivalent provisions, for example, in respect of other facilities such as public toilets.

Secondly, there are sexual harassment and sexual assault provisions in other ACT legislation that more directly and more effectively address the operative concerns identified in the consultation process.

If the prevention of this type of behaviour is one of the purposes of these particular offence provisions then they are sadly deficient as they assume that paedophiles only prey on children of the opposite sex.

While the reason for examining these provisions was related to how the provisions apply to transgender people, the reason for repealing the provisions is simply that they are ineffective and no longer appropriate.

The most significant amendments proposed for inclusion in the package of legislation are those relating to the legal recognition of parenting relationships in relation to the children of same sex couples.

These issues generated a great deal of comment during the consultation process.

The fact that the law is discriminatory is not in dispute.

Where submissions were diametrically opposed in view was on the question of whether this discrimination should continue.

The Government's view is that continued discrimination is not sustainable.

Regardless of views on the desirability of same sex parenting, the reality is that there are many different and diverse family models.

The Government's view is that we should deal with this reality.

Part of that reality is that children of couples who do not fit into the traditional model may not have two legally recognised parents.

The Government's view is that this is contrary to the best interests of those children.

The proposed changes will remove the discrimination between same sex and opposite sex partnerships and the children of those partnerships in respect of parenting.

When it comes to adoption, the paramount consideration in every case is the welfare and interests of the child concerned, and the Government's view is that

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