Page 731 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 19 March 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Mr Hanson: There were three matters—four, if that will help him.
MADAM SPEAKER: There is no point of order. The question was: was the former CPO correct? The attorney is responding in the policy framework of saying that it is his view, and that of the executive government, that the information around the benefits of anti-consorting does not stack up.
Mr Hanson: Madam Speaker, on your ruling, or your guidance, it was not about the broader policy framework. It was very specifically about whether more gangs were established in the ACT. I would have thought that it is a pretty simply yes or no, isn’t it?
MADAM SPEAKER: The question also included whether the CPO was correct in his assumption or statements regarding anti-consorting laws.
Mr Hanson: Well, was he? Were there more gangs or fewer gangs?
MADAM SPEAKER: I have made a ruling. I cannot direct him, other than as to whether it is relevant or not. I think the attorney’s answer is relevant.
MR RAMSAY: On this point, can I also note the advice and the public opinion that have been brought forward by members of our legal profession, who have simply said that anti-consorting laws are “just bad policy”.
MR HANSON: Attorney, was the former Chief Police Officer correct to say that everybody’s rights needed to be considered, not just those of outlaw motorcycle gangs?
MR RAMSAY: When we are considering matters of human rights with every single piece of legislation in this place it is a matter of looking at all the rights right across the entire community and it is a misunderstanding, a simplistic understanding, that the shadow attorney-general has propagated a number of times that it is simply trying to balance one person’s rights versus another person’s rights. That is far too simplistic an understanding and I think the shadow attorney-general should learn more about that, again noting what we will be debating in the chamber tomorrow.
It is a complex balancing of the rights of all people, competing rights across all people, and the advice on anti-consorting laws, including the advice that the shadow attorney-general was given by the Human Rights Commission before he tabled his legislation in the last sitting period, is that there are human rights matters of deep concern with anti-consorting laws. However, as I have said before, the commitment of this government is to be looking at matters that are effective, and the reason that we do not support anti-consorting laws is that they are not effective.
Crime—anti-consorting laws
MR MILLIGAN: My question is to the Attorney-General. In an article published in 2017 titled “Canberra’s lack of anti-gang laws attracting bikies”, the then CPO, Justine Saunders, warned that:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video