Page 460 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 16 February 2005
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
and/or children; and being charged by police or taken to court. It is absolutely atrocious that any man would ever seek to strike a woman or a child, but let us not forget that men are not the sole perpetrators. I do not know whether Ms MacDonald was referring to that or not, but she might comment on that in her closing.
Ms MacDonald: It is 89 per cent.
MRS BURKE: I gave you time to talk. Sorry?
Ms MacDonald: It is 89 per cent.
MRS BURKE: It depends where Ms MacDonald is getting her statistics. As I said, she needs to be very careful about making such broad sweeping statements in regard to statistics because they can be very misleading. Gender-based violence is a political argument. Attacking this problem has its merits, and I fully support the efforts of community organisations, many of which have been talked about. Mr Gentleman is involved and is a very strong advocate of no violence against women and children and against domestic violence. Aren’t we all? It is an obvious statement; of course we are.
I acknowledge that such events as White Ribbon Day play a pivotal role in raising awareness of gender-based violence. At the heart of this debate, the ACT Legislative Assembly should be looking at family violence—how men, women and children are affected by violence, and how we can put in place measures to protect them and find solutions. They can be additional legislative changes or community awareness, which is what a lot of those organisations that Ms MacDonald talked about do. That could be via education, rehabilitation and personal behavioural conduct to see why anyone commits acts of violence. Many of Ms MacDonald’s comments imply that violence against women and children comes from males only. Other research shows that it comes from across the community. I am not going to go into the details now. Obviously Ms Gallagher is going to give us some insight into that.
The costs—physical, emotional and financial—to society cannot be ignored. The Liberal Party would certainly like to see further investigation into all forms of violence, particularly in the ACT community, as I have said. Very little in this motion suggests that we are focusing on domestic violence in the ACT, apart from giving the government a pat on the back. The motion says:
acknowledges the ACT Government’s and others commitment to reducing the incidence of gender-based violence.
Then there is nothing—no action. Where is the action? Perhaps Ms MacDonald can let me know what we are going to do to address some of the problems that I am bringing up now. I am trying to find a solution as well. Look at the whole problem, not just part of it. We cannot change the world or simply throw our hands up in the air. These days it is an all too frequent cry from the government that it is happening all over Australia or all over the world. What about the ACT? What are we doing specifically about violence in the ACT? We need to look at violence and its effect, and in particular how it affects the family unit—whatever that may be—and how and why violence is committed.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .