Page 1942 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 7 June 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
that negates the fact that we are probably all working together to achieve an end. We just want to make sure that it is the right bill and that it is best-practice law.
Another issue that the Greens will be putting forward relates to taking photographs of Muslim women without a hijab when they normally wear one in public. I think that is equally problematic. Potentially taking a photo of a Muslim woman’s head can become a criminal offence with a two-year jail term. I think that is going too far and it is unworkable.
I think that the best approach is to deal with the issue of intimate images as a discrete bill. There are other issues at play, be it stealthing or others, and we need to look at those carefully. I think those should be covered by a discrete piece of legislation. Although consent is obviously a common thread, they are quite different in nature.
As I mentioned, we have also been talking to the Attorney-General about this approach. I would like to thank him for the discussions we have had so far with him and his staff. I note that everybody wants us to get on with this. We have now had a number of jurisdictions that have done so. This is now tabled. As I said it is as a consequence of a lot of advice that we have received. I am very happy to share with other members of the Assembly the advice that I have received from the Human Rights Commissioner, the bar and the Law Society that has got us to the point that we are at. If we can work on this together to get a result in August, that would be a good thing. I am very happy to sit down with the Greens and the Labor Party to discuss any views that they have and suggested amendments if they think there are enhancements or improvements that can be made to the legislation that has been tabled today.
This has been the result of a lot of work. I know that it is not just I, Ms Le Couteur and Mr Ramsay who are interested in this; others within our parties share an interest in this. I would like to thank the Law Society, and particularly Dianne O’Hara, for her feedback, and the Bar Association, especially Ken Archer. The Human Rights Commissioner and other commissioners provided very helpful analysis: Helen Watchirs, John Hinchey, Jodie Griffiths-Cook and Karen Toohey. Their responses were excellent; in fact we incorporated all of their suggestions into our bill.
The drafters at PCO worked hard on this bill and no doubt on the Greens one as well. They do an excellent job, and I would like to thank the drafters at PCO who have worked very hard on this bill, particularly noting that the exposure draft that was drafted is very different from the bill I have presented today. I would also like to thank Mr Ian Hagan in my office. It is very handy to have a senior adviser with an honours law degree who is an expert in and is passionate about the law, and who has been able to go through this in detail. He has worked with PCO so that we could present an excellent, very well considered bill and a very well drafted explanatory statement. I thank him very much.
In conclusion, it seems that we will, in this Assembly, come up with a bill that will stop what I consider to be a vile crime. There is detail to work through. There is much discussion still to be had, no doubt, but I am greatly encouraged that the three parties in this place have a unity of purpose, and that is to keep people who are victims of this terrible act safe in our community.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video