Page 156 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 13 February 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MR RAMSAY: When responses are being considered, as the shadow attorney-general I would hope is aware, it is indeed a balancing matter when it comes to working through the various human rights. What I have said before is that, with the dual way of looking at matters, both in terms of the human rights and in terms of the effectiveness, when any piece of legislation comes through, I will consider the advice and provide the human rights compatibility statement before a piece of legislation is tabled in the Assembly. It does form part of the considerations along the way.
Let me remind the Assembly of the laws that we have introduced that have had a significant impact: the anti-fortification laws, the crime scene powers and the drive-by shooting offence. The crime scene powers, which we worked through carefully, having regard to the human rights implications and the balancing of the human rights implications, are effective laws and have been used very effectively and very well by Taskforce Nemesis.
Again can I place on record my profound respect for the way that Taskforce Nemesis and ACT Policing are working with the increased powers that we have provided. We are providing further work across the nationally consistent laws, with the unexplained wealth provisions. I was very pleased recently to sign up to the intergovernmental agreement, on behalf of the ACT government, extending the commonwealth unexplained wealth law provisions. We are currently working on an ACT-based unexplained wealth law. So there is a continued rollout. We will attack the problem that is there, and we will provide effective laws that are human rights compliant.
MRS JONES: Minister, what distinction is made by you between the rights of outlaw bikie gang members as opposed to the rights of innocent members of the community—like those whose homes and cars have been mistakenly fire bombed or shot into because bikie members used to live in those homes—whose lives have been put in danger?
MR RAMSAY: Not only was there a question but two or three interjections have referred to five bikie gangs. It is important for us to make sure there is a correct statement—
Mrs Jones: Point of order, Madam Speaker. The question was about the distinction between the rights of outlaw bikie gang members as opposed to innocent members of the community. It had nothing to do with interjections.
Mr Hanson: On the point of order—stop the clock—to back up Mrs Jones, the minister cannot talk about an interjection that was made during a previous question in answer to a question before the Assembly now.
MADAM SPEAKER: Is there a point of order?
Mrs Jones: It is on relevance.
Mr Hanson: Relevance, of course.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video