Page 2921 - Week 09 - Thursday, 18 September 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
proposed legislation and how you would vote. But the fact is that our response to our constituents at the moment is one of putting a hand up, almost shrugging and saying, “I am sorry but we are not allowed to discuss this type of legislation in this parliament.” We can do a whole range of other things that are important to members of the community, but on that one issue, for which there are strong and diverse community views, we are not allowed to debate it. I think that is something on which, with the Assembly in its 25th year, we have demonstrated to the commonwealth that we are a mature parliament, that we do use our legislative powers carefully and responsibly, that we are responsive to the needs of our local community and that we should not be treated any differently to any other Australian living in any other jurisdiction. The territories should be treated the same.
The legislation that overrides or disallows us discussing this matter should be overturned. The Senate process allowed us the opportunity to put those submissions forward, and I think this motion today, if passed, will send a strong message to the commonwealth that they should consider removing that power and allow territory citizens to be treated the same way as citizens in other jurisdictions across the country.
We are doing a lot of work in relation to how we can improve our palliative care services and ensure that people are able to die with dignity. Whilst euthanasia and assisted suicide form a component of any discussion that you would have around that, there are a whole range of other ways that we can ensure that people are treated respectfully towards the end of their life, that their wishes are respected both by the medical community and their family. And that work will continue.
But in the meantime we have this gag order in place on the Assembly and I think it is time that that be reviewed and time that that was changed. The government will be supporting Mr Rattenbury’s motion this morning.
MR HANSON (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (11.37): I thank Mr Corbell for giving me the call. What I want to do—it might sound a little odd; I will explain as I go on—is congratulate Mr Rattenbury on at least being honest. He is not trying to pretend anything other than that this is a drive to get euthanasia into the ACT. From his speech, from his actions and from his comments in the media there is no question that that is what Mr Rattenbury wants to achieve. Whether you agree with that or do not agree with that, I do not think there is much pretence about Mr Rattenbury’s position.
However, I do not think the same can be said of the Chief Minister. It is quite clear what this agenda is. It is quite clear what is trying to be achieved here, which is to try to get euthanasia into the ACT, and it is quite disingenuous for the minister to try to hide behind the pretence that this is really about territory rights. We know what this is about, and we know it because it is Mr Rattenbury’s motion, and he has made it abundantly clear.
It is clear, Madam Assistant Speaker, that the Greens do want euthanasia. Argue for it or argue against it; that is the agenda. They have tried it in other jurisdictions and they have failed. Recently they tried it in New South Wales. It still remains a policy for the Greens. You can look at their website, updated in May 2014. The Greens New South Wales—and this is a consistent position that they have—believe:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video