Page 518 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 17 February 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
area of guardianship and substitute decision making in the ACT. It is anticipated the inquiry will be giving consideration to some of the legislative framework in the Powers of Attorneys Act 2006. When that report is received from the council the government will be in a better position to consider if any legislative reforms are necessary in relation to the operation of powers of attorneys.
I advise that there are a range of deeply held views in our community both in favour of and opposition to the question of whether a person should be permitted to choose how and when to end their life. Under the self-government act the Assembly does not have the constitutional capacity to permit euthanasia or the assisting of a person to terminate his or her life. The amendments to that act made by the so-called Andrews bill removed the power for this place to make laws permitting or having the effect of permitting assisted death or suicide.
In 2014 my Labor colleagues and I supported a motion calling for the Speaker of this place to write to the Prime Minister requesting that the commonwealth limitation on the lawmaking ability of the ACT should be repealed. This is exactly the same question as that around whether a law of this place can be disallowed by an executive veto of the federal cabinet. It is an undemocratic and unnecessary prohibition on the decision-making capacity of this place. If laws can be enacted and considered by the parliaments of the states in the federation, there is no reason why the territory should not equally be permitted to debate and potentially legislate on this important question. That is reflected in opinion polling. For example, an opinion poll conducted in 2012 by the Australia Institute of 1,400 people showed that 71 per cent agreed with the proposition that if a person is experiencing unbelievable and incurable suffering a doctor should be allowed to help them end their life.
I think it is the case that important questions need to be debated around the way we manage end-of-life decision making. My own view is that I continue to support in principle the capacity for someone at the terminal stage of a terminal illness to end their life with dignity and respect. But I also believe there needs to be significant work undertaken to ensure a model that protects against abuse, that protects the vulnerable and that protects those who perhaps are less capable or legally incapable of making decisions for themselves from being impacted adversely by such a legislative framework. That is why we should be able to have the debate. That is why we should communicate to the federal parliament that they should remove the prohibition on this place and the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly to be able to legislate and debate these questions.
I thank Ms Porter for her motion. It is an important one; it is a debate that will loom larger and larger in our society as more people age and live longer and they become a larger proportion of our population. (Time expired.)
MS FITZHARRIS (Molonglo—Minister for Higher Education, Training and Research, Minister for Transport and Municipal Services and Assistant Minister for Health) (3.34): I thank Ms Porter for moving this very important motion today. Ms Porter, as has been recognised, has been an incredible advocate for end-of-life issues and the health care that people receive in their final years, months and weeks. I thank her enormously for the work she has done, particularly with her community
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video