Page 1678 - Week 06 - Thursday, 23 July 2020
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
particularly in areas where, in their view, the bill does not go far enough. I acknowledge their concerns.
Whilst this bill may not achieve every reform, it is a step in the right direction. That is why we support it. Indeed, I understand that the Coronial Reform Group, although they would like to see further steps taken, support this legislation as well. As far as the Canberra Liberals are concerned, this is the first step for coronial reform. We will continue to work with families and stakeholder groups and make our own proposals and policies to go further and achieve even better reforms to the coronial processes in the future.
MR RATTENBURY (Kurrajong) (5.17): The explanatory statement for these proposed amendments notes that they are the result of extensive consultation with key stakeholders and families with lived experience of the ACT coronial system. I start today by acknowledging the sustained advocacy and passion of what has, over time, become the Coronial Reform Group. For many years now I have been meeting with this small and tireless group of bereaved parents who have, through the most tragic of circumstances, become involved in coronial inquiries in the ACT. Hearing their personal stories has had a powerful effect on me, and their, frankly, formidable desire to bring about deep and systemic change to the coronial process for future families is truly admirable. As the years have passed, they have refined their calls on government, but the heart of their concerns has been consistent.
They are seeking a less adversarial process that better recognises the impact of the death of a loved one when considering legal facts. They are seeking increased support for family members, whose mourning and grieving processes are complex and often interrupted and, most unfortunately, delayed while an inquiry is underway. They are seeking to have greater standing before the coronial court to ensure that the voices of the deceased’s family members are heard alongside the more sterile representations taken from file notes or clinical records.
They also want answers: answers about the services that may have provided treatment or care, often about benign, but opaque, government policies and procedures, and about the decisions and coordination of the various and many agencies that have often been in contact with people whose death has been referred to the Coroner’s Court.
At the end of this process, something that can take unfortunately many years, they want more than just a report with recommendations. They want and deserve a deeper engagement with the government about what has happened, what the impact has been and what will possibly change to reduce the likelihood of it happening again.
I know that the ACT government has been hearing their voices and others and that the bill before us today is, in part, a response to a range of genuine consultations and forums. I also appreciate that for many advocates the amendments we are debating do not go far enough, and that they feel that some of the more practical procedural reforms are not happening fast enough. Unfortunately, due in part to COVID-19 and the ending of this term of the Assembly, I also appreciate that some of this further work is just not feasible now.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video