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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 01 Hansard (Tuesday, 10 February 2004) . . Page.. 145 ..

I quote a comment made by the then Labor Attorney-General, Mr Connolly:

It is of credit to this community and this parliament that we have been able to run a debate on this issue and to run it sensibly; to talk about extending access to justice and the ability to enforce a right, instead of racing off on a tangent…and getting lots of media headlines and dividing the community. I sincerely thank all members of the Assembly for that, and particularly the Opposition.

It appears that the opposition, since that time, has changed its approach. It is unfortunate that the Liberals have resorted to some muck-raking, headline-grabbing behaviour, because there was a time when they considered themselves above it. We have seen their colleagues in other jurisdictions rise above the mud-slinging to support reforms to remove discrimination. It is unfortunate that we have not had that level of informed debate today, because it reflects badly on the opposition and it reflects badly on this Assembly.

MR STANHOPE (Chief Minister, Attorney-General, Minister for Environment and Minister for Community Affairs) (10.57), in reply: The government introduced this bill as the second stage of its commitment to address laws that discriminate on the grounds of sexual preference or gender identity. The bill, along with the Parentage Bill, is a significant step forward in Labor’s commitment to give practical effect to the principle that all people are entitled to participate in society and to receive the protection of the law, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

It is also part of the government’s broader commitment to building a culture of respect for human rights through the introduction of a human rights act for the ACT. The main purpose of this bill is to remove discrimination relating to sexuality and relationship status. The amendments that the government has proposed with respect to the recognition of same-sex relationships are a direct and practical manifestation of the right to equality before the law and freedom from discrimination.

The bill amends a number of provisions that are currently expressed to apply only in respect of a spouse, which may or may not be defined to include a de facto spouse, so that they apply to the broader category of domestic partner. The amendments build on the concept of domestic partnership that was included in the Legislation (Gay, Lesbian and Transgender) Amendment Act 2003. The bill will also provide increased protection against discrimination on the grounds of sexuality, transsexuality or HIV/AIDS status through the inclusion of anti-vilification measures in the Discrimination Act 1991.

In addition, the bill contains an amendment to the Crimes Act 1900, to address the issue of the availability of the defence of provocation in the case of non-violent homosexual advance. This is commonly referred to as the homosexual advance defence. The approach that the bill takes in addressing the use of the homosexual advance defence is non-discriminatory in that it is not limited to only a non-violent homosexual advance, but applies to any non-violent sexual advance.

The amendment provides that a non-violent sexual advance towards the accused by the deceased is not to be taken, by itself, to be conduct which could have induced an ordinary person, in the position of the accused, to have so far lost self-control as to have formed an intent to kill the deceased, or to be recklessly indifferent to the probability of causing the deceased’s death. However, such conduct may be taken into account with

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