Page 2916 - Week 09 - Thursday, 18 September 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
But, critically, the ACT does not have the right to do this. This Assembly does not have the right to legalise euthanasia, even if it did follow all of the regular democratic and consultative processes. Unlike in the states of Australia, this democratically elected ACT parliament cannot make decisions on euthanasia for the benefit of the citizens who have elected us.
So this motion is about re-establishing the right of the ACT Assembly to legislate on euthanasia if that is what it wanted to do as a democratically elected and competent parliament. It is about recognising that the people in the ACT should have the same rights as anyone else. It asks this Assembly to agree that ACT residents should not be treated as second-class citizens.
The limitation on the ACT’s right to legislate on euthanasia is due to a restriction, imposed by the commonwealth in 1997, when the Australian parliament amended the territory’s self-government act to specify that it could not make laws on euthanasia. The commonwealth took back part of the legislative powers it had already conferred on the ACT when it granted self-government. Our grant of power allows us to make laws for the peace, order and good government of ACT residents, to look after health, education, prisons, courts and criminal laws, to hold our own elections, and all the other activities that we undertake.
But then there is one clause inserted arbitrarily that says, “You cannot make laws on euthanasia”. The rationale for this was purely political. The federal government at the time wished to find a way to prevent the operation of the Northern Territory’s newly passed euthanasia act. So, in an ad hoc reaction, it amended the self-government act to say that territories could not legislate on euthanasia. This has remained in place ever since, and the federal government has not moved to remove it. To put it bluntly, I think this restriction is an outrage. It is anti-democratic, and it discriminates against ACT citizens.
Unlike all the other Australian states, the ACT cannot legislate on euthanasia for the benefit of the people living in its jurisdiction and for whom it is democratically elected to govern. People in the ACT are the same as people in any other state and suffer the same as people in any other state. Why cannot this Assembly govern for them on issues that are important? This would be no more or less than the rights currently enjoyed by people living in the states of Australia.
The restriction is also anachronistic, as the ACT has clearly proven it has a competent and effective parliament that should not be subject to arbitrary interference from the commonwealth. Just as Australia was initially established as a colony of Britain, the ACT was originally set up with some restrictions on its power. Since then, the ACT has operated as an autonomous and effective parliament, managing the same portfolios as the states manage, such as health, education and corrections.
And federal parliament has since recognised the ACT’s competence and autonomy by removing other restrictions on the ACT’s powers. The commonwealth executive can no longer unilaterally overturn legislation enacted by the legislative assemblies of the territories. The ACT Legislative Assembly now also has the power to determine the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video