Page 2007 - Week 07 - Thursday, 13 August 2020
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MS LAWDER (Brindabella) (5.32): I seek leave to move amendments to this bill that have not been circulated in accordance with standing order 178A and have not been considered by the scrutiny committee.
Leave granted.
MS LAWDER: I move amendments Nos 1 to 4 circulated in my name together [see schedule 2 at page 2027]. As I have previously stated, the age when a person becomes fully responsible is a difficult matter and one which is currently being debated around the country in relation to the age of criminal responsibility. The most recent meeting of the Council of Attorneys-General acknowledged that more research needed to be done, and they are not expecting that report for consideration until next year.
As we have acknowledged, these are difficult challenges. In this instance we believe that 12 is too young to take these steps without a parent’s or guardian’s support. After all, we are talking about someone still at primary school. Given all the complexities, we believe 14 years of age to be a more appropriate age. I commend my amendments to the Assembly.
MR RATTENBURY (Kurrajong—Minister for Climate Change and Sustainability, Minister for Corrections and Justice Health, Minister for Justice, Consumer Affairs and Road Safety and Minister for Mental Health) (5.33): The government will not be supporting these amendments. It is surprising to have received them today.
This bill was tabled in the Assembly on 23 July. The Canberra Liberals have not sought a briefing on this bill in this period. We had to defer the debate this morning to enable these amendments to be finished by the Parliamentary Counsel’s Office today so that they could then be circulated during the middle of the day. So it does feel a little rushed, that this is a last-minute thought. The amendments that have been proposed literally almost do not have the ink dry on them from the Parliamentary Counsel’s Office.
But it is the substance of the issue that is really the important matter here. As the explanatory statement clearly sets out, Equality Australia conducted an independent and comprehensive legal audit of ACT legislation and regulations for laws which could discriminate against or cause harm to LGBTIQ+ people. The amendments in the government bill are modelled on the recommendations made by Equality Australia in its report entitled ACT LGBTIQ+ Legal Audit: Reforms for an Inclusive ACT.
The report identified areas for law reform to remove discrimination and help to make the ACT a safe, respectful and inclusive jurisdiction for all. In refining the policies for the change of gender identity, the government consulted A Gender Agenda; the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal; the ACT Human Rights Commission; the births, deaths and marriages registration section within Access Canberra; the ACT Office for LGBTIQ+ Affairs; and the Youth Law Centre, which is a division of Legal Aid here in the ACT. As the Chief Minister said in his foreword to the capital of equality strategy:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video