Page 4254 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 23 October 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
criminal penalties regarding cannabis supply or possession or trafficable quantities of cannabis and the artificial cultivation of cannabis plants. The passage of this legislation is consistent with this government’s intention to achieve better outcomes for existing cannabis users by destigmatising its use and encouraging our citizens to access treatment and support when it is needed.
Today we have heard again Mr Hanson continue to clutch at straws in his ongoing attempts to oppose the further decriminalisation of the personal use of cannabis. His views are well known. They were made public at least, if not before, along with the openness of the Chief Minister to consider this, back in 2016, prior to the last election. For all his feigned outrage that he has generated again today, it is clear that he will argue just about anything he can to prevent this change occurring which we know is not only in the interests of but also the will of the Canberra people.
In his speech, possibilities suddenly become high likelihoods. Words slide in his speech. Concepts are twisted. It is his debating style. Let me make clear that I am unaware of any advice the commonwealth Attorney-General has received about the legislation’s validity. Despite incorrect reporting and statements that have been made by the ACT Liberals, it is important to clarify that the commonwealth Attorney-General in his letter to me makes no comment regarding the validity of the laws. The accuracy of words matters, especially when considering issues of legislation and the powers of government. The shadow Attorney-General should be very well aware of that.
After extensive consultation and the provision of comprehensive legal advice, the interaction between the legislation and the commonwealth Criminal Code was a consideration in constructing the legislation to ensure that it would have the desired effect. This government has been clear. I have been clear in this place. We have been clear in the public discourse, up-front with the Canberra community that, despite extensive analysis of the complex legal framework and carefully considered drafting, there remains a risk of commonwealth prosecution for cannabis possession.
The legislation was drafted with the intention of providing a clear and specific legal defence to an adult who is prosecuted by the commonwealth for possessing small amounts of cannabis in the ACT. Section 313.1 of the commonwealth code provides that the offence in section 308.1(1) does not apply to conduct that is justified or excused by or under a law of the state or territory in which the conduct occurs. Similarly, section 313.2 provides a defence against prosecution under section 308.1(1) where that person was under a mistaken but reasonable belief that the conduct was justified or excused by or under a law of a state or territory.
As this government has maintained, and despite the claims of the commonwealth Attorney-General, the use of either defence provided by the operation of the act would be not a matter for the Attorney-General’s Department or the Attorney-General but obviously a matter for a court to consider. Whether a court would be convinced that an argument by extension from a taxation case that has nothing to do with drug possession was a sound legal argument is indeed highly uncertain. Only the relevant court can determine the outcome of raising such a defence, and this government is far
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video