Page 4114 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 20 September 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Two important amendments are the insertion of the objects section, which will set the overarching purpose for how the act should operate, and some clarification about the role of counsel assisting the coroner. The Greens support these amendments because, as I touched on earlier, coronial hearings are potentially highly emotive.
Clearer legislation and a better articulation of the roles of the coroner and counsel assisting are in the interests of the families involved. Any confusion during a coronial hearing must be avoided wherever possible, and the amendments made today will go some way towards making the coronial process a smoother one.
In conclusion, let me say that the Greens support the bill and support the government commitment to assess again in two years whether a dedicated coroner is required in the ACT.
MS BRESNAN (Brindabella) (5.59): I will just speak briefly. As my colleague Mr Rattenbury has outlined, the coroners bill makes some good advances which the Greens support. I personally welcome the elevated status of the deceased family in the coronial process, the requirement that a coroner consider if recommendations should be made and the need for the Attorney-General to table recommendations in the chamber.
There are additional items, however, that have not been addressed through the bill today but do concern me as the Greens’ spokesperson for health and disability. Those concerns relate to deaths involving a suicide or a person with disabilities. My office contacted a wide range of health and disability community groups when forming our response to this bill, but we did not receive comments. This appears to be because of the community sector’s limited resources and the fact that they need to focus on what they consider to be core business.
While I do support what is proposed in the bill today, I also believe there are reforms—
At 6 pm, in accordance with standing order 34, the debate was interrupted. The motion for the adjournment of the Assembly having been put and negatived, the debate was resumed.
MS BRESNAN: While I do support what is proposed in this bill, I also believe there are reforms needed regarding mental illness and disability. For example, if a person with disability starves while in a group home or respite, the coroner is only required to look at the case if it meets a very strict list of tests, as outlined in clause 13 of the act. The most relevant test for this kind of situation is if the person with disability has died under suspicious circumstances.
In reality, if a person with disability dies while in care and there is a suspicion they were not being cared for properly, it would require either a passionate parent or the Public Advocate to lobby the coroner to regard the death as being under suspicious circumstances and therefore worthy of investigation. Requiring the parent to push for such an inquiry creates an added burden, given the grief they would be going through.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video