Page 4259 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 23 October 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The passage of the Drugs of Dependence (Personal Cannabis Use) Amendment Bill has created not only national interest—there is no doubt about that—but also an unusual amount of interest from the federal government and the agencies that they oversee. In fact, there has been a period of very public statements and letters shared in the public domain, with some, frankly, disappointing but quite predictable posturing.
I do not intend to spend too much time talking to the motion that is before us today. We have had plenty of debate on this matter, and the will of the Assembly is that these amendments will come into force in the near future. That is the bill that has been passed by this place. A date has been indicated for that, and, subject to the work being done which the government has given a clear undertaking to do, the act will come into effect early next year.
With respect to the views of each political party and representative most of us have put our views on the record, and these issues have been well canvassed in this Assembly—actually, no; it turns out that we do not fully know Mr Parton’s point of view. The Greens, both here and nationally, have outlined for many years why this sort of legislation is the right way forward. We hope that the commonwealth government one day realises that it is the will of the majority of people that small amounts of illicit substances should not see undue involvement in the criminal justice system.
Mr Hanson made some deal of his view of the ambiguity. I think the situation is quite clear. The ACT has passed these laws. They are the will of the ACT Assembly, and it will be the law in the territory early next year. There is, as has always been the case, a commonwealth law that applies across the country, including here in the ACT. It comes down to the fact that this sits entirely with the commonwealth as to what they choose to do next. There is a range of discretion available to the commonwealth here. Mr Hanson referred to the possible consequences for citizens of the ACT, but any prosecution of an ACT citizen that takes place will be entirely on the heads of the commonwealth.
This is a choice for the commonwealth government. If they choose to prosecute ACT citizens, that is entirely on them, and that is where this matter stands. The law in the ACT is clear. The ACT government have made clear their expectations for ACT citizens, and I call on the commonwealth to respect that position of the ACT government. The states and territories should be given the respect and autonomy to fulfil the wishes of the majority of elected members of this Assembly and of other parliaments, should they choose to go down this path.
The way that the commonwealth is treating the ACT does reflect that it continues to be the case that ACT citizens are treated as second-class citizens in this federation. If this discussion was being had in New South Wales or Victoria, there would be substantial outrage at the likely commonwealth intervention. But here in the ACT it is standard fare. I trust that the commonwealth will respect the actions of this Assembly, that it will recognise the discretion that it has, and that it will not interact with ACT citizens in a way that it would not do for any other citizen anywhere in this country.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video