Page 2195 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 4 August 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
policing of whether a minor has been supplied alcohol, whether they had permission, whether it was done in a responsible way and whether the individual supplying alcohol knowingly did that. Was it responsible? What constitutes approval and what does not is very ambiguous, and the elements of proof are ambiguous.
The determination and decision as to whether to press charges are essentially in the hands of the police officer. I would suggest there will be a wide variety of expectations and views as to what is appropriate. In some households, in some cultures, the use of alcohol is permissible. For some people under the age of 18 from a European background, the discretion is exercised that alcohol is a part of the cultural norm. In other households, perhaps people of Muslim faith from the Middle East, it is banned for everybody.
Where is that determination? Where is the line drawn? The problem is that it is not made clear in this legislation. It is up to the authority knocking on your door, from the police. Perhaps one police officer has one view, while another holds another view. It will be very unclear to parents, to adults hosting a party, what the rules are, what constitutes permission and whether they are going to get into trouble or not.
Similarly, it extends to the fifth element that I have concerns with, which is where parents supply alcohol to their child. In essence it says that if you do it in a responsible way, that is okay. If you do it in an irresponsible way, it is not and it becomes an offence. Who makes that decision? Is it the police officer that turns up? Is that the way that we exercise laws in this place? I think that if this comes into effect, anybody reading this, any parent, would be none the wiser about what actually constitutes “responsible” or “irresponsible”, because it then becomes very subjective in the minds of the police or any individual serving that alcohol. I will quote again from the scrutiny report:
it will be very hard for a person at a private place to assess whether they are exercising responsible supervision, being an assessment that will have a bearing on whether they are charged with a criminal offence;
a wide area of discretion will be left to a police officer to decide whether to lay a charge; and
it will be left to the courts to determine, over time, the matters relevant to making the assessment, thereby in effect requiring the exercise of legislative power.
There are serious concerns that we are basically giving away the discretion as to what becomes a criminal offence to the police. That should not be a matter for a police officer to determine. A police officer on the ground turns up to a private home, gets in between a parent and their child—maybe a parent and their 17-year-old child—and it is now up to a police officer in this town to determine whether a criminal offence has occurred. And based on what? Based on their assessment, based on what they think: is that responsible service of alcohol or not? I want the minister or Mr Rattenbury, in responding on this legislation, to explain to me the number of scenarios. Explain to me where it is and where it is not responsible. The explanatory statement explores the impact on parents. It says:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video