Legislative Assembly 12591 15 June 1995

THURSDAY, 15 JUNE 1995 Collins; Research Director, Luisa Pink; and Lisa Shuttleworth of the committee secretariat. I express our thanks also to the Deputy Clerk, Michele Cornwell and the Clerk Assistant, Mr SPEAKER (Hon. J. Fouras, Ashgrove) Committees, Rex Klein for their guidance and read prayers and took the chair at 10 a.m. support. I commend this report to the Parliament PETITION and move that the report be printed. Ordered to be printed. The Clerk announced the receipt of the following petition— PERSONAL EXPLANATION Moreton Bay Remark by Member for Brisbane Central From Mr Hollis (5,149 signatories) requesting the House take steps to correct the Hon. N. J. TURNER (Nicklin) habitat loss and degradation of Moreton Bay. (10.05 a.m.), by leave: Yesterday during the Matter of Special Public Importance debate, Petition received. the member for Brisbane Central, Mr Beattie, named me as a consorter and conspirator in corruption in Queensland. I find that remark COMMITTEE OF SUBORDINATE offensive to myself and my family name. I LEGISLATION possess a clearance from Mr Drummond and Report the Taxation Department of being involved in Mr J. H. SULLIVAN (Caboolture) any corrupt activities of any kind. The actions (10.04 a.m.): I lay on the table a report which of the member for Brisbane Central are not is anticipated to be the final report of the only cowardly, untrue and designed to mislead Committee of Subordinate Legislation. The but also they do little for his integrity and report that is tabled today is an historical view credibility. of the work of the committee over 20 years I value my name for honesty and integrity. and, as such, raises no new issues and If the member for Brisbane Central has any requires no response. However, the report will decency and principle I expect him to rise provide members of Parliament and the public immediately, withdraw his remarks and with a better insight into both matters of apologise. concern to the committee and the way the committee has addressed them. PERSONAL EXPLANATION On behalf of the Committee of Subordinate Legislation of the Forty-seventh Marlin Slaughter Parliament, I would like to thank Ministers and Mr PERRETT (Barambah) (10.07 a.m.), departments for their assistance in resolving by leave: In the House on Tuesday night, I issues of concern raised by the committee spoke about the slaughter of marlin by a during that time. As chairman, I would also like company controlled by Mike Rowley. I made to express my appreciation to committee the point that the Queensland Commercial members Len Stephan, Gordon Nuttall, Peter Fishermen's Organisation, among other Pyke, Fiona Simpson, Denver Beanland and groups, opposed a Rowley proposal to Stephen Robertson for the manner in which increase the number of boats fishing in the they have carried out the responsibilities protected zone and another to increase the entrusted to them by the Parliament. number of hooks per line. Finally, the work of the committee over In the House yesterday, the Minister for the past 20 years would not have been Primary Industries wilfully misrepresented my possible had it not been for the excellent position. He knows as well as I do that Rowley service provided by those people who have is not a Queensland licensee and thus cannot served as committee staff from time to time. belong to, let alone represent, the On behalf of the members of the present Queensland Commercial Fishermen's committee, I would like to express our Organisation. Despite that knowledge, the gratitude to the staff who have assisted us Minister stated— during the Forty-seventh Parliament: Madeline "The member for Barambah last Cook, Sarah Reilly, Sandy Rowse, Monica night tried to indicate that the particular Hayes, Helen Grant, Dr Donald Gifford and to person concerned in the fishery was a the current staff: Acting Secretary, Megan representative of Queensland fishermen." 15 June 1995 12592 Legislative Assembly

The Minister deliberately misrepresented of activity was 7,000 patients a week. Owing to my position; there is no way his particular the increased funding given to health and the conclusion could be drawn from my speech. reforms in the health system under this The only decent course for the Minister would Government, each and every week there is an be to withdraw his comments, and I ask that approximately 40 per cent higher level of he do that. activity in Queensland hospitals than there Mr FitzGerald interjected. was under the National Party Government. Mr SPEAKER: Order! I warn the In relation to individual low-activity weeks member for Lockyer under Standing Order that may occur—it must be remembered that, 123A. Honourable members, I can understand under this Government, a low-activity week is that emotions could be running high but, still higher than a high-activity week when the whatever day it is, I am not going allow the National Party was in Government. Speaker of this Parliament to lose his Furthermore, it will always be the case that authority. from time to time, in every hospital, there will be the requirement to close surgery for one reason or another. In some cases, closures PRIVILEGE occur for maintenance reasons; on other Dryander National Park occasions, closures occur for budgetary Mr SLACK (Burnett) (10.08 a.m.): Mr reasons. The Leader of the Opposition misled Speaker, I rise on a matter of privilege and the House in his question because that seek a ruling from you. Last week in the previous cancellation in Townsville to which he House, I asked the Minister for Environment referred did not occur owing to budgetary and Heritage a question in respect of the restrictions as he implied but because the excising of 60 hectares of land from Dryander specialists had asked to go to a medical National Park. The Minister said that she was conference. On that previous occasion, the unable to give me an answer at that time and surgery was cancelled because the specialists that she would give me an answer subsequent went to a medical conference. This to my asking the question. To date, I have not Government rightly supports the need for received an answer to that question. specialists to undertake ongoing training. Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is not a On occasion, whether it is owing to matter of privilege. training, maintenance or budgetary restrictions, there will be a requirement to close surgery. Record budgets are provided and QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE managers have to manage according to their Townsville General Hospital budgets. Managers also have to manage according to the requirements of maintenance Mr BORBIDGE (10.09 a.m.): In and ongoing training. It is called professional directing a question to the Premier, I refer to a management. memo from the Townsville General Hospital's Director of Surgery, which I will table, which indicates that, in order to achieve cost savings Queensland Rail Refuelling Depot, to offset the hospital deficit, the week 19 to 23 Moreton Bay June has been designated "low activity week" when elective admissions will be cancelled. As Mr BORBIDGE: I refer the Premier to this follows an earlier low activity week from 6 his Government's decision to site a to 12 May and the frequent practice of quiet Queensland Rail locomotive refuelling depot days in other major hospitals for similar, cost- with provision for storage of up to 270,000 saving reasons, I ask: why is it, when his litres of diesel and oil on land reclaimed from Government has injected an extra $1.3 billion the Moreton Bay Marine Park, and I ask the into the Health budget, that low-activity weeks Premier—when he finishes getting his briefing are now being declared in Queensland from the Deputy Premier—why has he allowed hospitals? this project to proceed? Mr W. K. GOSS: Every week in A Government member interjected. Queensland hospitals is a high-activity week— certainly much higher than they were under Mr BORBIDGE: The member sold them the National and Liberal Party Governments. out. Why has the Premier allowed this project Let me give members the figures. Every week, to proceed without first conducting an more than 10,000 patients are treated in the environmental impact assessment or allowing public hospitals of this State. Under the local input through a public consultation previous National Party Government, the level process? Is this not a further example of the Legislative Assembly 12593 15 June 1995

Government's discredited environmental Mexican track—and members can place any record? connotation they like on the word "Mexican". Mr W. K. GOSS: The Leader of the Queensland has zero net debt. I can say Opposition was correct when he digressed that no Government in any other State in from his question; I was trying to get some Australia is increasing spending in important information from the Deputy Premier, who has social areas such as we are doing in been following this matter closely. The Leader Queensland. In the last Budget, we increased of the Opposition is right; the Deputy Premier spending on health by 11 per cent— $207m— does know more about this matter than I do. and yesterday Mrs Sheldon was saying, "We However, I can say that comprehensive will have to find more money for health. We studies were undertaken by the Department of will have to start racking up debt." If that is her Environment and Heritage and the attitude, I think that the people of Queensland Department of Primary Industries. As a result will have to take a really good look at the of those studies, those departments were Opposition. If the Opposition believes that satisfied that the proper studies had been increasing debt is going to solve our problems, undertaken and that the proper precautions then it is swimming against the tide. It is going had been taken. to spend today and make the kids pay tomorrow. Queensland's Net Debt Status There are only two outcomes to Mr LIVINGSTONE: I refer the increasing debt—eventually we have to face Treasurer to Budget figures which show that up to it and eventually we have to pay. The Queensland has zero net debt. I refer also to only way we can pay for it is to increase taxes media reports in which the Liberal Leader as the Governments in the other States of questioned the merit of Queensland being in Australia are doing. Victoria has tried this this strong financial position. I ask the method. It used to keep increasing debt and Treasurer: can he inform the House whether increasing taxes. Now it has had to sack there are any benefits for Queensland from 30,000 public servants and close 200 schools being net debt free? and goodness knows how many hospitals. It is selling off all of its assets. The only thing that Mr De LACY: There are enormous the State will have left soon is the Formula benefits for Queensland from being net debt One Grand Prix. The new Government of New free. It seems to me that not just South Wales is going to eliminate net debt. Its Queenslanders but everybody throughout ultimate long-term fiscal objective is the Australia is starting to recognise those elimination of general Government net debt by benefits. It seems that the only group of the year 2020. people who do not recognise those benefits is the State Opposition. Mr Connor: 2020! We never receive any policies from the Mr De LACY: I might say that that State Opposition, but I think that a bit of consistency is 25 years behind Queensland, but at least it is starting to emerge in relation to its attitude is going in the right direction. In fact, the to debt. Yesterday, on no fewer than six Government in New South Wales is even occasions—and this was replayed on the 7.30 going to introduce debt elimination legislation. Report, and I hope that everybody watched It is going to make it mandatory for all it—Mrs Sheldon was asked and on six Governments in the future to reduce debt. So occasions she refused to give a commitment all I can say to Mrs Sheldon is that when she that she would retain Queensland's net debt misses out here, she will not even get a job in free status. I say that a bit of consistency is New South Wales. emerging because honourable members will recall that last year, during an interview with Coral Dredging, Green Island Anna Reynolds, Mrs Sheldon was asked about her attitude to debt. At that stage, on Mrs SHELDON: In the absence of the seven separate occasions Mrs Sheldon made Minister for Environment and Heritage, I refer reference to the need to run an overdraft. Mrs the Premier specifically to proposals for coral Sheldon stated that all good businesses run dredging on the eastern side of Green Island an overdraft. It seems extraordinary to me that in Moreton Bay and to the marine park zoning when all Governments around the world are plan for the bay in general, and I ask: since waking up to the fact that if they cannot pay the Premier's Minister stated in print early this their way, they should not spend the money, year that the plan was being finalised and will Mrs Sheldon is going to take us down the be completed in the middle of this year, what 15 June 1995 12594 Legislative Assembly is the fate of the Green Island dredging issue? say? He said that he had no firm evidence of When can we expect to see the plan? the drug problem. Here is the so-called Mr W. K. GOSS: As I understand it, responsible shadow Minister—— that plan is being finalised. I am sure that as Mr Cooper: Why don't you investigate soon as it is finalised, the Minister will make it all those allegations? The media know about public in this place or make it public generally. it. It is a contentious issue. There is a theory, Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable or proposal, that the dredging can be carried member for Crows Nest is on his last warning. out in a way that will not be destructive to the The honourable member asked a question environment. On the other hand, legitimate and the Minister is answering it. That is the concerns have been expressed by fishermen, system. including some very well-known fishermen, Mr BRADDY: The honourable member and also by environmentalists. The had better sit there and cop it, because he is Government will take all of those matters into going to cop it today like he did the other day. consideration in making a rational decision, and it will keep the member posted. Mr FITZGERALD: Mr Speaker, I seek your ruling on this matter. Interjections are normally allowed during question time, but Drug Abuse in Prisons persistent interjections are not. The Minister Mr BUDD: I refer the Minister for Police answered some of the interjections. He is and Minister for Corrective Services to standing there waiting for the call and he is Opposition claims about authorities condoning debating the issue. the abuse of drugs in Queensland prisons, Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable and I ask: is there any evidence to support member will resume his seat. these claims? Mr BRADDY: When questioned, the Mr BRADDY: Yes. Those claims were honourable member for Crows Nest said that made by the honourable member for Crows he had no firm evidence of the problem. What Nest, who is the Opposition spokesman on he is doing is what he has done for these matters. The honourable member has a years—grandstanding. It is similar to what the track record in relation to making claims of this honourable member did in 1994, when in a nature, which I will come back to shortly. His press release he claimed that at a Townsville claims are serious in that he accuses—— prison there were 700 marijuana plants, two Mr Cooper: Are you going to sool the mobile phones and irrigation equipment and cops onto me? lighting in the ceiling of the prison. So the prison officers investigated that claim, and Mr BRADDY: Mr Speaker, this is a what did they find? Nine empty plastic buckets serious matter. and two brooms! That was the evidence for Mr Cooper interjected. the 700 marijuana plants, two mobile phones, Mr SPEAKER: Order! I warn the and irrigation equipment and lighting in the member for Crows Nest under Standing Order ceiling of the prison. 123A. Mr Connor interjected. Mr BRADDY: These are serious Mr SPEAKER: Order! I warn the matters. As we all know, the use of drugs in member for Nerang under Standing Order prisons around the world is a matter of serious 123A. concern for authorities and certainly for me Mr Cooper interjected. and this Government. I will deal with that issue shortly, too. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Crows Nest has persisted in making The honourable member's accusations interjections. This is his last warning. are very serious. In a press release referred to in the Courier-Mail, the honourable member Mr BRADDY: The honourable member made comments to the effect that prisons for Crows Nest has no credibility. He has been were "full of drugs", which gaol managers exposed for his beat-up in relation to the ignored because drugged prisoners were quiet Townsville prison. He was exposed in his own and easy to manage. In other words, he is Courier-Mail article when he said that he had claiming that the prison authorities are no firm evidence. deliberately using and encouraging the use of I have an interesting document in my drugs as a policy. In the same Courier-Mail hand. It is a media release by Russell Cooper article this morning, when asked to dated 6 June. The document contains some substantiate that claim, what did Mr Cooper notes on the back and was purportedly Legislative Assembly 12595 15 June 1995 prepared by him for his speech in in the interests of the environment of the Rockhampton recently at the launch of the Brisbane River. campaign for the Honourable Vince Lester I recall being in this place when Mr and Sam Hassall. Under the heading "Issues", Borbidge, Mr Cooper and their colleagues set his notes list law and order, health, education up Brisbane River committees and engaged in and Government services. all the stunts in the world. They talked about Mr Cooper interjected. doing something about the Brisbane River, but Mr BRADDY: It was found on the floor they never did anything about it. The Minister of the annexe. After making a phone call, the for Environment in this Government, Ms member walked away and left it on the floor. Robson, has done that. Honourable members Beside the heading "Issues", in big capital opposite cannot take it. They just want to letters, are the words "beat up". The knock every positive thing that this honourable member is the greatest beat-up Government does and every positive merchant in this Parliament. I table the achievement of the Minister for Environment. document. The honourable member is the We are going to phase out the dredging. beat-up merchant par excellence. The Instead of knocking that, members opposite member for Crows Nest has no credibility on should applaud it. the issue of drugs in prisons, just as he has no credibility in any other area. He will do and say anything to attract attention and he is the Undermeasuring of Alcoholic biggest grandstander in this Parliament. The Beverages member for Crows Nest is the greatest beat-up Mr ARDILL: I ask the Deputy Premier merchant of all time. and Minister for Consumer Affairs: is he aware of a widespread problem in regard to the undermeasuring of alcoholic beverages and, if Sand and Gravel Dredging, Brisbane so, is the Department of Consumer Affairs River doing something about it? Mr SLACK: In the absence of the Mr BURNS: Years ago, there was a Minister for Environment and Heritage, I direct poem about the man who watered the a question to the Premier. I refer to the recent workers' beer. Nowadays, consumers are decision to end sand and gravel dredging in being similarly disadvantaged by the the city reaches of the Brisbane River. Given undermeasurement of spirits. The changes to that there is an acknowledged need for this the Trade Measurement Act to address the material to support the construction industry, I problems came into force in July 1994. Vast ask: does this mean that sand and gravel volumes of alcohol are sold in licensed dredging will simply be shifted upstream to the premises, which means that even small Wivenhoe Dam section of the river and its variations in volume can put consumers at a tributaries so that the degradation will be out major disadvantage. The Consumer Affairs of sight and out of mind? What investigations officers have been told to show no mercy have been undertaken to assess suitable sites towards licensed premises that are caught not that will not jeopardise the Brisbane Valley complying with the new requirements. The environment and yet will provide supplies close legislation requires rum, vodka, whiskey, gin to end users? and brandy to be sold by accurate volume Mr W. K. GOSS: This is something for measurement. The Act also requires the use which the Minister for Environment and of new and improved measuring devices. Heritage has been responsible and she There are about 5,000 licensed premises deserves much credit for bringing about this in Queensland. Since July 1994, as a result of result. It has been the result of a lengthy the changes, inspectors have visited 2,000 of process of consultation by the Minister for those locations. So far, 3,456 measurement Environment with various bodies. I probably instruments have been tested, of which 244 cannot name them all, but the list certainly were found to be incorrect. That is a lot of includes the Brisbane City Council and also instruments. If the member for Warrego were those sections of the business community involved in this activity. As I understand, the running a licensed premises, the number dredging will be phased out over one to two would be 245. A range of options, including years. The Minister has negotiated so that this prosecutions, are available to inspectors when activity will be ceased in the Brisbane River. It premises are found to be in breach of the Act. is not a case of the Minister seeking to move it So far, Consumer Affairs officers have out of sight and out of mind; it is a plan by her succeeded in obtaining five convictions. The to phase out in a responsible way this activity Waterloo Hotel in Newstead was fined $2,500 15 June 1995 12596 Legislative Assembly in the Brisbane Magistrates Court for selling this State. If the member were listening earlier short measures to drinkers. A Beaudesert in the week, he would have heard me detail company trading as Logan and Albert Hotel, some of those figures. As he was not listening, 12 Brisbane Street, was convicted and fined it appears as though it is necessary to detail $400 in the Beaudesert Magistrates Court for them again. I was referring to the figures that selling nips of rum through an unapproved Mr Borbidge misused in relation to the two and uncertified spirit-measuring instrument. surveys that are available and his deliberate Most recently, the company trading as the use of the less reliable figures. I will not go Brisbane Underground was fined $1,500 in the through all of that material again. However, it Brisbane Magistrates Court for not using an is important to make the point that, in the first approved spirit-measuring instrument, and a 65 months of the Goss Government, bar attendant at Transformers was fined $150 Queensland has generated almost 193,000 for the same breach of the Trade new jobs. In the same period, the rest of Measurement Act. In the Brisbane Australia created 187,600 jobs. In other words, Underground case, trade measurement during that very lengthy period—which is the inspectors from the Office of Consumer Affairs way in which overall performance or the trend purchased a rum and coke and a bourbon is identified—Queensland created more jobs and coke on the premises in October 1994. than were created in the rest of Australia. That The Brisbane Underground was convicted is a record of which we can be proud. twice. The measurement of the spirits As the member for Clayfield should have delivered was determined by free-pouring a heard from the Minister for Employment, part quantity of spirit from the bottle into a glass. of the reason that we were able to boost that This is no longer allowed because it provides job creation record even further was not just very inaccurate measurements. In the because of the strength of the economy and Transformers case, the sale of spirits was the general policies of this Government— conducted using an unbranded K-Way spirit- which are designed to encourage investment dispensing instrument which did not bear an in employment by keeping taxes and charges inspector's mark or a licensee's mark. lower than those in other States—but also Many good licensees out there are urging because the $150m Jobs Plan, which we us to press on with the checking of spirit- announced during our last term and which the dispensing instruments, because some of the Minister for Employment has so capably nightclubs have a reputation for dealing administered, has seen jobs created up and unfairly with their customers. Most of the down the State, including in regional licensed hotels have been quite good. Queensland. However, a few operators in the industry do In relation to youth unemployment—I not follow the rules. For 244 incorrect make the point that I made to the Leader of measuring instruments to be identified out of the Opposition the other day; that is, we have 2,000 inspections shows that this problem is to be accurate about what we are measuring fairly widespread. and bear in mind that those figures do not include all the youth in that particular age cohort, many of whom are engaged in other Job Creation activities, whether they be at university, college Mr SANTORO: I refer the Premier to the or in other forms of training. I have here two Budget forecast of 7.7 per cent charts which are very instructive for this unemployment for 1995-96 and to the ABS particular member and for all members. The Labour Force Status—Queensland Regions first chart shows the number of employed published last night, which shows an wage and salary earners and the aggregate unemployment rate in May for 20 to 24-year- jobs created during the National Party olds of 17.2 per cent in Wide Bay, 20.2 per Government. The chart outlines both the State cent on the Darling Downs and in the south performance and that of the rest of Australia. west, and 19.2 per cent in Mackay—just to Needless to say, under the National Party the mention some of the worst evidence of the top line is that representing the rest of Government's failure to generate jobs for our Australia, with a strongly rising graph trend young people. I ask the Premier: given that his line, and well underneath the national last election catchcry was "jobs, jobs, jobs", performance is the line for Queensland. That why has the Government failed to deliver is the picture under the National/Liberal employment opportunities for young Government. The second chart also shows the Queenslanders? number of employed wage and salary Mr W. K. GOSS: We have a very earners—the same category—and the impressive record in terms of job creation in aggregate jobs created during the Goss Labor Legislative Assembly 12597 15 June 1995

Government. That chart has Queensland as Let me acquaint the House with the the top line and the rest of Australia as the expertise that we gain with IMG coming on bottom line. Queensland is well ahead—and board. IMG is the world's largest independent consistently well ahead—when it comes to job source of televised sports; it is the promoter of creation, both for the general population and a wide variety of sports and cultural events; it for young people. is a sports marketing consultant to major The job creation record of this corporations; it is the world's largest celebrity, Government has been very strong in the corporate and trademark licensing company; it regions as well. Part of the reason why this is a literacy agency and book packager; and it Government took positive action in the Wide is the manager and presenter of world- Bay region with the growth and development renowned classical music artists. IMG has over package was to stimulate that economy and 2,000 full-time employees around the world, to create jobs. It has occurred in a way that spanning 62 offices worldwide, and it has has created more jobs in the Wide Bay region specialists in marketing, finance, law, than were lost due to the cessation of logging broadcasting, tax, publishing, public relations on Fraser Island—an activity which the and, of course, sports and arts management. coalition and its candidate want to restore. That outlines just a small selection of the Furthermore, the strength of the Queensland activities in which IMG is engaged. economy and the massive job-creating Let us consider the events for which IMG investment that this Government is making in undertakes sports management in Australia. infrastructure, particularly in rail infrastructure, They include, just for starters, the Australian enabled Walkers to compete for its share of Open golf championship, the Australian that massive investment. I visited that area Masters, Greg Norman's Holden Classic, the only weeks ago to see the direct and indirect Australian Skins tournament, Uncle Toby's jobs being created by this Government in Super Series, and being official marketing Maryborough and Wide Bay because of that agents for the Australian Rugby Football investment of hundreds of millions of dollars of Union, the Ford Australian Open tennis job-creating rail infrastructure work. tournament and the 1994 World Masters Games. International Management Group Internationally, IMG is involved in an average of six events each day worldwide. Mrs ROSE: I refer the Minister for What is interesting to note out of its very Tourism, Sport and Racing to public marvellous track record is the fact that it is the comments by the member for Southport owner, marketer and promoter of the questioning the ability of the International Cleveland IndyCar Grand Prix, the Detroit Management Group to make the Gold Coast IndyCar Grand Prix—can anyone think of a Indy a success, and I ask: can the Minister better firm to have involved in the Indy Car advise the House of IMG's credentials in race on the Gold Coast—NEC's World Series international sports management and detail of Golf, Toyota World Match Play and the some of the company's successes in Australia World Professional Figure Skating and overseas? Championships. The people involved in that Mr GIBBS: I thank the honourable last championship have been working closely member for the question. Mrs Rose is the only with this Government in the hope of bringing member on the Gold Coast who takes an the next World Figure Skating Championships interest in the Indy event and who works hard to Brisbane and Queensland. Achieving that to promote it among her constituents and the will be a marvellous coup. business houses who support it. The question Mr Elder: They'll knock it. is indeed timely, because after the absolutely disgraceful performance by the member for Mr GIBBS: I will take the interjection Southport in this House yesterday, one would from the Minister because he is absolutely have hoped that he at least would have learnt correct. This lot opposite will do their best to a small lesson that he is on a losing streak on shaft it. They will find some way to criticise it this issue, but apparently that is not the case. and to bag it. Whatever it takes, they will find He continues to bag the event and, some reason to try to destroy it. furthermore, now attacks one of the most Further, IMG is involved with the reputable firms around, International Singapore Open Golf Championship and the Management Group, which has become Rugby World Cup. In the arts and involved in the event. I must mention that the entertainment division, IMG has been member for Albert also works extremely hard responsible for implementing and promoting to promote the event. acts such as the Jesus Christ Superstar 15 June 1995 12598 Legislative Assembly musical, Westside Story, John Farnham, Jose the Queensland Opposition that would do Carreras, Placido Domingo, Clive James and marvellous things for them. I will not give too Dame Kiri Te Kanawa. much advice, but because I am in a charitable Also, I would like to advise the House of a mood this morning, I will simply say, "Get on number of other events in which IMG is board with me with both of these events. I can involved worldwide: the Winter Olympics, the help you through a difficult time. I am a decent Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St Andrews, human being. I am prepared to help you, but the United States Golf Association, the only on this one occasion. If you keep it going, Augusta Masters, the British Open—— I will just have to get nasty." Mr Horan: What about the national lifesaving championships? Queensland Principal Club Mr GIBBS: Yes, it is also involved in the Mr JOHNSON: While the Minister for lifesaving championships on the Gold Coast. I Tourism, Sport and Racing is in a charitable am glad the honourable member raised that mood, I ask him whether he can explain why matter. Why did I know that somebody over the Queensland Principal Club is ignoring that side of the House would take the bait? It pleas for class numbered racing in western does not surprise me that it was him. Let me and north-western Queensland? tell the member about the lifesaving Mr GIBBS: If that backbench member championships. I understand that the latest were the Leader of the Opposition, I believe I thing that the Opposition is starting to wind up could cut a great deal with him. He is a decent about as part of its ongoing bagging human being and a much finer person than campaign is the fact that on 31 March next the current Leader of the Opposition. If the year, during Indy Car, the national lifesaving member has a problem with the Queensland championships will be held on the Gold Coast. Principal Club, he should stop asking me to There are two things members of the interfere with the operations of the QPC. Opposition must understand about marketing, Members from that side of the House, promoting and the tourism industry. This is particularly people like Mr Beanland, very simply called market segmentation: two constantly talk about Government interference different markets, two totally different products. in the racing industry. However, what they do However, because we are aware of that, and not seem to understand or accept is that, because we were aware that there would be a when we made the major changes to the clash, a number of weeks ago we put into Racing and Betting Act some three and a half place with Queensland Events Corporation a years ago, the involvement of the Minister for structure to ensure that we will bring both of Racing in the day-to-day affairs of the racing these organisations in for a discussion. A industry were cut from the Racing and Betting proper and professional management plan will Act. That is now vested with the Queensland be worked out so that we can ensure that the Principal Club. Gold Coast will not only be absolutely assured Mr Gilmore: You turned your back on of maximum accommodation during both of them. those particular events, but we will also make sure that they are marketed so that they will Mr GIBBS: No, I did not turn my back be worked together to ensure that this will be a on the club at all. There was no turning of the huge festival event for the Gold Coast. back, but I will tell the member something: What more would the Opposition like? there could be a coming up of the front, and I There could not be two better groups working will tell him why. Once Temby finishes having a together. It is a sad fact of life that, on that very good look at the racing industry in New side of the House, there is a group of people South Wales, I will probably be very hard who have been in Opposition now for five and pressed to not make some recommendations a half years and who still have not accepted to my Cabinet colleagues to implement some their role. Government no longer belongs to of the things I am sure that he will recommend them. They are not the natural Government of in relation to the New South Wales racing Queensland; they never were, they never will industry. In my opinion, whatever he be. They will be in Opposition for a long time. recommends should set the benchmark for The first rule I learnt during my 12 years in the rest of Australia to follow. Remember I said Opposition was: to get into Government, a that, my friend. party has to learn to be a good, constructive In relation to the Queensland Principal Opposition first. That is the first rule. None of Club, the QPC has been out there consulting the members opposite seems to be picking up with country clubs in Queensland. It knows the on that. I could write a book titled How to Help rules. I will reiterate what I said here some Legislative Assembly 12599 15 June 1995 weeks ago: there will be no backing off on the systems. These savings can typically be requirement of a minimum number of starters recouped within two or three years after the in races. That is something for the QPC to initial installation of the solar film. implement; it is its decision and I support it. There are clear benefits to such a demand measure. The fact that the Goss Energy Efficiency and Alternative Government has embarked on such a Energy Statement revolutionary step is indicative of the fact that it has genuine, positive policies to protect our Mrs BIRD: I refer the Minister for environment and contribute to reducing the Minerals and Energy to the recently greenhouse effect. announced energy efficiency and alternative energy statement, which included Opposition members interjected. commitments to pursue demand-side Mr McGRADY: Contrast this to the efficiency programs. I ask: can the Minister so-called policy of the people now jeering. I inform the House what sorts of programs have draw members' attention to the coalition's been introduced to increase energy efficiency document—yes, it has one on energy! Page 9 for commercial users and what sort of benefits of the document states quite clearly that the could be expected? coalition will not pursue Labor Government Mr McGRADY: The energy efficiency initiatives in the energy policy statement. and alternative energy statement is a Those include the initiatives under the significant initiative which lays the foundations demand-side energy program. The initiatives for a more energy efficient Queensland and, they are referring to include rebates and ultimately, a greener Queensland. A key incentives to use energy-efficient lighting, use element of the strategy is a revolutionary step of insulation for water heaters, etc. towards demand-side management to Mr Gilmore: Tell us about the improve energy efficiency in this State. This will administrative costs. feed back into energy production through reduced demand on existing energy Mr McGRADY: I will tell the House when production sources. In essence, making better I am good and ready. It is a pity this character use of energy will reduce the need for over here does not sit back and listen to some environmentally unfriendly and expensive of the answers given to him. All he does is energy production. parade up and down this State making accusations about a group of people who are Assisting Queensland commercial energy doing a tremendous amount of work for this users with the purchase of solar window filming State. This character has asked about two is one of the features of our demand-side questions in the last three years. Mr Gilmore is management incentives for business. The a phoney who does not know what he is amount of energy required to aircondition a talking about. commercial building, and the cost, of course, depends on how much heat must be removed Mr Burns interjected. from within the building. Some of the heat Mr McGRADY: The alternative energy comes from people using office equipment group has been working long and hard around and appliances within the building, but a major this State. No wonder the Deputy Premier is source of such heat is sunlight coming through sitting here helping out. The Workers Heritage the windows. The penetration of heat through Centre in Barcaldine is an excellent example windows has been increased by recent of what has been achieved by this architectural trends which see buildings with Government, and knockers such as Mr large areas of glass and an absence of Gilmore have made no contribution effective overhangs or shade devices. Under whatsoever. Mr Gilmore, you are a fraud. You these conditions the energy consumption for do not know what you are talking about. airconditioning is fairly high. In fact, Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Minister's airconditioning is often the largest consumer of comments will be addressed through the energy in commercial buildings in Queensland, Chair. even during the winter months. Solar heat loads through windows can be reduced by 60 Mr McGRADY: Through you, Mr per cent through the application of solar Speaker, I repeat: you are a fraud. window film. This would cause tremendous Opposition members interjected. energy and cost savings through reductions in the size and capacity of airconditioning Mr McGRADY: It is your question time. systems in new buildings, and reductions in Mr SPEAKER: Order! I am in charge. I energy consumption in existing airconditioning call the member for Maroochydore. 15 June 1995 12600 Legislative Assembly

Hilmer Reforms; Competition Ultimately, it is not a question of deregulation, Principles Agreement it comes down to this test: is the particular Miss SIMPSON: My question is to the legislation or regulation something which Honourable the Premier. The week before impedes competition? If so, are the benefits of last—— that legislation or regulation outweighed by the costs? That is the basic test in relation to Mr Elliott interjected. whether or not that legislation or regulation Mr SPEAKER: Order! I warn the should stand, should be amended or should member for Cunningham under Standing be removed altogether. Order 123A. Can a day pass without my giving This is directing the process of reform the member one of those? towards removing anti-competitive practices Miss SIMPSON: My question is to the with the simple goal of substantially boosting Premier. The week before last in a Senate the Australian economy and substantially Estimates Committee, a senior Federal boosting jobs in this country. I think it is a very Treasury official said that Queensland had telling reflection on the Liberal and National undertaken a survey of legislation which would Parties in this place that, when it comes to have to be reviewed under the Competition promoting and supporting competition that will Principles Agreements signed by the States boost the economy and boost jobs, they are and the Commonwealth. I ask: as this the only Liberal/National Party coalition in the potentially affects thousands of Queensland country that is opposed to competition. small businesses, will the Premier table the survey and tell the Parliament if he is going to introduce principles legislation on Hilmer Reading Skills of Tertiary Entrants reforms into the Queensland Parliament? Mrs EDMOND: I ask the Minister for Mr W. K. GOSS: I know the member is Education: has he seen comments in today's a new and young member-— Courier-Mail by Professor Hiram Caton of Mr Santoro: Patronising as usual. Griffith University in which Professor Caton claims that only 20 per cent of students Mr W. K. GOSS: I am not being entering university had basic composition and patronising, I am being helpful. reading skills and that up to 30 per cent need Mr Santoro: Not at all. remedial work? Does the Minister believe there Mr W. K. GOSS: Just listen. The is a major problem in this regard and, if so, member asked me this question earlier in the what is the Government doing about it? week. I settled a very detailed answer for her Mr HAMILL: I did indeed see the last night which should be available today, or reported comments of Professor Caton in this tomorrow at the very latest. The answer does morning's press. As Education Minister it not improve by her asking the question twice. I caused me great consternation indeed to drafted a detailed answer last night and the learn from Professor Caton that only 20 per member will have a copy of it today or cent of students entering university have basic tomorrow. composition and reading skills and that 30 per Miss Simpson: What's in it? cent needed remedial work—in his opinion. It caused me greater consternation to learn that Mr W. K. GOSS: I am not going to go there has been a massive decline in the through it; the member will get it. In summary, performance of our students in the last 24 it is this: a survey had to be done of those areas of legislation that have an impact on hours. Yesterday, a letter from Professor competition, and most of them are fairly Caton was published in the Australian newspaper. In it he referred to students obvious. I am sure that by flicking through the entering university and said, "Many lack Acts members will be able to identify those for advanced skills in reading and written themselves. All States now have to complete composition". Yesterday they were lacking a review of legislation and prepare a advanced skills and today they are lacking statement of their State's position, to be basic skills. I wonder what has gone wrong available by the end of June 1996, and we will with our education system. do that. Secondly, this survey and statement will Mrs Sheldon interjected. be carried out in full consultation with all Mr HAMILL: Was that the member for affected groups, whether it be local authorities Caloundra? That is the sort of incisive with whom we have established a process to commentary that we have come to expect carry out this work, or whether it be with from the Liberal Party. I assume by that industry organisations or business groups. incisive comment that the Leader of the Legislative Assembly 12601 15 June 1995

Liberal Party concurs with Professor Caton's year for the implementation of the Wiltshire views? Suddenly we have silence! I assume recommendations, and that is why a very that the contribution of the member for important tool for our endeavours to focus on Caloundra would indicate that she concurs literacy and numeracy is being put in place. By with Professor Caton's views. the end of this month, the work to complete Mr Foley: I think she is concentrating on the diagnostic net for Year 2 students will have numeracy rather than literacy at the moment. been done. The continuums for reading, writing and numeracy have been developed. Mr HAMILL: Monosyllabic perhaps? If Already, some 600 teachers are in place Professor Caton's words were considered to supporting the Wiltshire reforms. be an accurate reflection of the state of preparedness of our students leaving high I also draw the attention of the House to school to engage in tertiary studies, then well the fact that the Queensland Curriculum one might say that it is a damning indictment Council, the body which was established in of an education system which was presided legislation to oversee the review of school over for 32 years by members sitting opposite. curriculums, has had its first meeting; it is The sorts of students that Professor Caton already in place and working hard to augment identified as being deficient in literacy and this Government's strong commitment to numeracy were those who did their primary education in this State. I want Professor Caton education under the previous Government. If to cut out the hyperbole and report accurately Professor Caton's comments were accurate, on the achievement of our students; they are one might well ask: what indeed did Liberal doing very well. and National Party Governments do for This Government is committed to further education in this State over many years? improvement. Regardless of what Professor Mr Purcell: Nil! Caton might say on this matter or, indeed, on the issue of education generally in this State, Mr HAMILL: I think I heard the member we are continuing our commitment to high for Bulimba making a contribution—dare I say standards in education. We are also a much more detailed contribution to this continuing to provide greater access for more discussion than that of the member for and more students to higher education. Caloundra. The previous Government did very little for education over those three decades. Indeed, Queensland was tailgating the rest of Tree-clearing Guidelines Australia in the provision of education. Mr HOBBS: In directing a question to Other authorities do not share Professor the Minister for Lands, I refer to a media Caton's views. I know that it must be statement yesterday by Professor Brian disappointing for members opposite that, Roberts, head of the Land Use Study Centre when an old mate tries to slam the education at the University of Southern Queensland, system, he does it in such a very heavy- slating this Government's draft tree-clearing handed and inept way. The Board of Senior guidelines as "precautionary principle gone Secondary School Studies has provided me mad". In particular, Professor Roberts with detailed material which identifies a emphasises that protecting up to 90 per cent number of aspects regarding the performance of trees on leasehold land will produce a of our secondary school students. The Board serious financial risk to producers, that clearing of Senior Secondary School Studies makes did not necessarily lead to land degradation in the clear point that it believes that high certain areas, and that this Government's standards are being achieved by students decision has completely overruled a producer leaving our schools. consultation process which was based on But this Government is not prepared to realistic tree-retention rates of 10 per cent to rest on its laurels with respect to education. 20 per cent. I ask: will the Minister now admit We have demonstrated our commitment to that the draft tree-clearing guidelines, which education by bringing down successive record are being used to assess tree-clearing budgetary provisions for education—$2.6 applications, are seriously flawed? Why does billion this year. A centrepiece of our provision he still persist with measures which have for education is, of course, the implementation long-term adverse impacts on the viability of of the Wiltshire committee recommendations, primary producers and the sustainability of particularly with respect to literacy and farming and grazing land in Queensland? numeracy. Whereas our students are doing Mr SMITH: I am not aware of the well, there should always be room for particular comments to which the Opposition improvement. That is why some $52m has spokesman refers, but by and large the already been set aside over last year and this question he asks is no different from the 15 June 1995 12602 Legislative Assembly questions he has asked on several previous Government already has a concession in occasions. My response then, and my place encouraging employers to employ response today, is to restate and emphasise— people under 21 who have been unemployed. because surely, sooner or later, he will get the In fact, a 100 per cent rebate is offered to any message—that the guidelines are draft employer who employs a young person in guidelines only; they are being looked at not Queensland who has been unemployed for 12 only by the ministerial committee but also by months. The Labor Party does not have to the working party comprising a group of debate that issue at its conferences; that is its people, including Government officers but, policy. The Liberal Party is debating that issue more importantly, representatives from the at its conferences, but it cannot even support Cattlemen's Union, the United Graziers that. Association, the National Farmers Federation Mr Mackenroth: And rejecting it. and the conservation movement. Those people have expertise, and they are reviewing Mr De LACY: They are debating it and those guidelines. Later this year, they will rejecting it. come back to us. The sorts of things that the It will be one of the great farces of honourable member is saying are absolutely Queensland politics if the coalition goes to the meaningless until we settle on the final election promising tax cuts to the people of guidelines. Queensland; they cannot get them through their policies. The Leader of the Liberal Party is promising to increase debt. As I said, if one Payroll Tax increases debt, the only way one can pay for it Mr NUTTALL: In directing a question to is ultimately through increased taxes. I say to the Treasurer, I refer to a decision by the State the people of Queensland: if the Liberal Party Liberal Party conference at the weekend to comes out with a pseudo policy at one minute reject a call by the Deputy Leader of the to midnight promising to cut taxes, they ought Coalition to remove employees under 21 years to accept it with a grain of salt. of age from the payroll tax net, and I ask: can Mr SPEAKER: Order! The time allotted the Treasurer inform the House whether the for questions without notice has now expired. Goss Government offers any payroll tax incentives that encourage the employment of young Queenslanders? CRIMINAL CODE Mr De LACY: I am pleased that the Second Reading honourable member drew to the attention of Debate resumed from 14 June (see the House that—— p. 12584). Mr FitzGerald: So he was there, was Mrs SHELDON (Caloundra—Leader of he? the Liberal Party) (11.09 a.m.): I rarely give this Mr De LACY: He probably reads the Government credit because it rarely does newspapers, as we all do. anything worth praising, but I must admit that Mr FitzGerald: He believes it all? this time I must give credit where credit is due. The fact that the Premier and his Attorney Mr De LACY: If it is not true, I would be have decided to bring on this Criminal Code interested in a denial. Time and time again, I for debate is either one of the most politically have seen the Leader of the Liberal Party courageous or one of the most politically jump up in this House and deny things which stupid steps I have ever seen. I have a good were published in her name. An article in the idea that it is probably the latter, but I am sure Courier-Mail of 12 June stated— that time will tell. "Meanwhile, the Liberal Party The reason I say this is that this Criminal yesterday rejected a policy championed Code has to be one of the most ridiculed, by its leader Joan Sheldon." despised, ineptly thought-out pieces of If she cannot get a win in the Liberal Party, legislation ever to come before this House. how does she get on with the nine of them in Some of the phrases used to describe this here? The article continued— Code include "simplistic", "hopelessly flawed", "The final day of the party's "puzzling", "wrong-headed", "archaic", convention failed to support a motion "appalling", "madness", "fundamentally calling for an end to State payroll tax on flawed" and "political correctness gone mad". employees under 21." Mr Santoro: They have been generous. For the education of members of the Mrs SHELDON: Yes, I think they have Opposition, I point out that the State been. Before the Attorney has a fit, I point out Legislative Assembly 12603 15 June 1995 that none of those comments were made by Mr Fagan sums it up quite well. The fact is that members of the coalition—not one. All of the Queensland Labor Government has those comments were made by those who displayed this ineptness and this illusory public were either involved in drafting the original consultation in just about every major decision draft of the Code in 1992, or those who will it has made in the last six years. have to work with the Code. Rob O'Regan, I ask honourable members to consider QC, Terry O'Gorman, Michael Quinn, John the closing down of the country railroads, the O'Gorman, the Victims of Crime, Ian Dearden, changes to the Queensland Fire Service and Zoe Rathus and a coalition of 28 women's the Queensland Ambulance Service, the groups have all criticised this Criminal Code HOME scheme, the southern Brisbane toll and they have all been ignored by the State road, the changes to the health system, the Government. land clearing Act, the Penalties and The fact that the Attorney-General has Sentences Act, the closure of the Woodford even brought this legislation before the House prison, the changes to the Titles Office, the in its current form is amazing. As I said, it is mess over the Gold Coast Indy, Compass either blind courage or gross stupidity. The list Airlines, Gondwanaland and the blow-out in of critics of this legislation stretches through the Convention Centre costs, the almost every area of the community touched subcontractors legislation which has totally by the law. The Queensland Law Society has failed to protect the subbies, Eastlink, the criticised this legislation, as has the Council for industrial relations disaster in Mount Isa—and Civil Liberties. The former Chairman of the the list goes on. Now we can add the Criminal Criminal Justice Commission and eminent Code to the list of total disasters that have lawyer, Rob O'Regan, QC, has slammed the occurred under this Government. proposed legislation, as have women's Mr Santoro: It's outrageous. groups, pro-life groups, police officers, academics and just about anyone who has Mrs SHELDON: It is outrageous. anything do to with the law. In fact, the very I will now speak about some of the details people who submitted the report on reforming of this Code which will cause many problems the Criminal Code have spoken out against for the people of Queensland and, indeed, the this document that is before the House today. State's entire legal system. One of the most critical areas where this Code has failed the The fact that, after more than five years of trying, the Attorney could come up with such a people of Queensland is clause 320(1). This reviled Criminal Code exposes just how clause deals with indictable offences being pathetic and inept Queensland's so-called decided summarily by the Magistrates Court. chief law officer is. But honourable members In essence, under that clause, a Magistrates should not rely on just me for that opinion. I Court can deal with an offence punishable by turn to an independent observer, someone up to seven years' imprisonment. Not only who has no reason to criticise the Attorney- does this end the right of trial by jury for General's performance except in the most thousands of accused persons a year; it also objective sense. David Fagan from the means that many criminals receive lesser Australian newspaper succinctly detailed the sentences than they deserve and less than failings of the Attorney-General in his article in they would have received had the case gone yesterday's newspaper. It is an article that I to trial in a higher court. am sure all of us have read, and I cannot Crimes covered by that section include resist quoting just two paragraphs. I see that some sexual offences, some drug offences, the Attorney has walked away; obviously, he unlawful use and possession of a motor does not like any justified criticism. Mr Fagan vehicle, burglary and fencing stolen goods. stated— The maximum gaol term that a magistrate can impose is two years, yet cases with a "Poor Wells. It looks like his Criminal maximum gaol term of up to seven years will Code—far from being the model for a now be able to be heard by a magistrate. That uniform national Code—is just a pup, is a double whammy, and it will lead to double saleable only through the weight of disaster. On the one hand, the accused is numbers he will have when the Bill is denied the former basic right under our legal voted on. system of trial by jury and, on the other hand, That this is the case after five years the convicted offender is likely to get a lighter of consideration demonstrates how sentence from a magistrate than he or she politically inept the usually smooth Goss would have done from a trial judge. Government can be and how illusory is its The automatic right to trial by jury is one much-prided consultation." of the cornerstones of our entire justice 15 June 1995 12604 Legislative Assembly system, yet that has been thrown out by none knew the car had a fault or not when he or she other than the Attorney-General of the State. sold it. That sort of dispute is currently covered The continued bleatings of this Government by civil law, and that is where it should stay. So that it is toughening up sentencing provisions we have yet another case where the Attorney are exposed by this section of the Criminal has made a mess of it, making change for Code as nothing more than meaningless change's sake, and causing more problems rhetoric. As I said, two major problems exist in instead of streamlining the law, which is surely just one clause. What is worse is that the what he should be doing. reason for this axing of a basic right of all I am raising some specific issues in this people, that is, the right to have their case hopeless Bill to highlight the fact that the Bill heard by a jury of their peers, is an attempt at should be withdrawn and rewritten. One more getting more cases through the courts. That is specific area on which I wish to focus attention right—the abolition of the basic right of trial by is Schedule 2, clause 130A(1) under the title jury for the sake of expediency, because this "Corroboration". I believe more than anyone Government cannot properly organise criminal that criminals should get what they deserve. I cases, because it cannot ensure that cases believe that those who are convicted should are heard within a reasonable time, and serve their sentence in prison without being let because it does not adequately fund our legal out early. I believe that we need a law and system. This Criminal Code should go back to order system that offers a deterrent to crime. the drawing board. But this change in the area of corroboration Another aspect of major concern is the does not in any way do that. Currently, in a provisions in the Criminal Code regarding jury trial where there is no corroboration, the palliative care, which leave the door open for judge is directed to warn the jury that it may be euthanasia. Mr O'Regan stated that the Code dangerous to convict. This is particularly adopted a "simplistic" approach to palliative important when it comes to cases in which a care which, and I quote his words, "creates the criminal turns on his or her accomplices and possibility of legalised euthanasia." I saw the becomes a witness for the prosecution. It is Attorney on television trying to explain this not unknown for criminals in that position to provision away, and it did not make me or, I embellish their stories to improve their own think, anyone else watching the news that position and lighten their sentence. night feel any confidence in this Code or the Under the old Criminal Code, in such Attorney. The Premier is quoted as saying that cases the judge would instruct the jury that it it is not the Government's intention to legalise would be dangerous to convict on the euthanasia by a back-door method. I am so uncorroborated evidence of an accused glad that that is not the Premier's intention, person. Now, under this new Criminal Code, but the sad facts are that this Code does the judge is not instructed to give such a exactly that. It introduces back-door warning; it is optional for him or her to do so. euthanasia without any debate within the That could be a green light—it is a green community and without a conscience vote in light—for a judge to opt out of giving any such this House. The only question is whether the warning. It is a major change to our justice Government intended to introduce legal system which means that juries are now more euthanasia or whether it was just plain likely to convict on uncorroborated evidence. I incompetence by the Attorney in drafting the know that that is a cause of concern to many Code. Either way, it is just another example of lawyers in this State. how wrong the Attorney-General has got it when it comes to this Code. Mr Wells: Are you opposed to the Women's Coalition on this issue? Another respect in which this Criminal Code fails is the new section on fraud, clause Mrs SHELDON: Is the Minister opposed 184. Fraud was not a separate and definitive to listening to the lawyers? They tell me that crime under the previous Criminal Code. The they have briefed him and that he has not Attorney has included the section relating to taken their briefing into consideration. fraud, but it is open to some weird and As I stated earlier, I am more than happy wonderful interpretations. Previously fraud was to ensure that convicted criminals serve their covered under other sections, and this has full sentences. I have been, and will continue worked well. Now the waters have been well to be, critical of this Labor Government for its and truly muddied. One scenario would be a weak and soft stance on crime. It has been car dealer selling a vehicle that had a fault. only when Labor's polling figures show that the Under this new Criminal Code, the owner of people of Queensland no longer feel safe that that car would be able to bring a criminal case this Government has attempted to act, and against the car dealer, whether the dealer even then it has acted in a half-hearted Legislative Assembly 12605 15 June 1995 manner. This is a patch-up job. Dean Wells, Mr Santoro: There are no interjections who over the last five years has acted more about this. like Bambi when it comes to toughness, all of Mrs SHELDON: That is right, because a sudden is now trying to act like Clint Government members know that I am right. Eastwood. By golly, he has not pulled it off! Police are experiencing the frustration of Paul Braddy, who has hidden behind his watching courts allowing juvenile offenders to Police Commissioner whenever things have go straight back out on to the streets. The become tough on the law and order front, is Family Services Department is a disgrace. It now trying to act like Action Man. "Act" is the no longer has anywhere near the number of operative word: this Government acts tough, it welfare officers that are needed to counsel mouths the rhetoric, it makes the right noises, young offenders, let alone supervise those but it does not do anything. Government offenders who have been released on members are a Punch and Judy show. They community service orders. This Criminal Code are puppets making lots of noise but achieving does not solve any of those basic problems. I nothing. That was demonstrated this morning do not believe that this Criminal Code has by the absolutely moronic comments of been thought through properly by the members of the Government's back bench— Attorney-General and that, after five years, he or, to be precise, not just by the members of is still a long way from getting it right. the Government's back bench. I wish to return to one of the statements We are not talking about some tacky law made about this Criminal Code. I refer to the and order auction, such as we saw in New fact that it is political correctness gone mad. South Wales, we are talking about the issue This Code has been through so many drafts that is the key to our Queensland lifestyle. We and through so many versions that it is no are talking about safety in our homes, safety wonder the Attorney-General gets confused. when walking our suburban streets and safety However, I think that is his normal state. I refer in our workplaces. Surely it is not too much to to the "I love you" controversy of March this ask that a Government provide safety for its year. An earlier draft included a provision that citizens. However, this Government has not if someone was found to have lied when delivered. The people of Brisbane and the saying "I love you" in the process of a people of Queensland are concerned about seduction, that could be an offence under the their safety. They want a return to a level of Code. What a joke! Thankfully, when I read a public safety that ensures that kids are safe in later draft of the Code, I saw that that their own homes and communities. The provision had been removed, but that concerns of the community about the lack of highlights the twisted logic of the Attorney- law and order in this State are real. General in his convoluted journey to this Over the past 12 months, break and enter inadequate final document we have before us. crimes have increased by 24 per cent. Every The reason why the Attorney-General has day, Queenslanders are becoming victims like been tied in so many knots by this Code is never before. Every day, 1,000 that, once again, the State Government has Queenslanders become victims of crime and, failed to live up to its rhetoric. It has failed to every year, one in four Queensland families carry out genuine public consultation on the become victims of crime. As I said, Labor Code prior to trying to push it through this talks tough, but it does little. Last year, one in Parliament. three people arrested for armed robbery were Under Labor, public consultation is dead, either on parole or on day release from jail. and has been so for years. The only real One offender served just three months of a consultation undertaken by the Government in three-year term for armed robbery, and he had regard to the Criminal Code was with the seven previous convictions. Another offender, committee appointed by the Attorney-General with 61 previous convictions, served just nine and chaired by Mr O'Regan. Unfortunately, months of a four-year sentence for stealing that committee's report, finalised in 1992, has with violence. Another offender who raped an been ignored by the Attorney-General in many elderly woman and burgled her home was key areas. "Consultation" has become a dirty given an eight-year sentence with a minimum word to the Labor Government, but it is the of only two years to serve. very lack of consultation which has caused the The Juvenile Justice Act is a disgrace. outbreak of anger and frustration against this Young offenders are threatening police and Criminal Code. are treating the police, the courts and the law One of the real problems with the law and with contempt because they know that they order crisis in Queensland is not the Criminal can get away with it. Code, but the Penalties and Sentences Act. 15 June 1995 12606 Legislative Assembly

Even if this Criminal Code legislation before Queenslander will not be able to afford justice the House was perfect, it would not be a in this State. panacea for the problems plaguing the justice New language in the Criminal Code and corrective services in Queensland. That is means new interpretations of the law, and new because the Penalties and Sentences Act is interpretations mean every clause in this Code weak. It is a flawed piece of legislation, much is a legal minefield for the Crown. This like the one we are debating today, and it Pandora's box of a Criminal Code will leave therefore makes Labor's entire law and order the Queensland legal system in disarray. thrust weak and ineffectual. The Penalties and Lawyers doing their job in defending or Sentences Act undercuts any toughening of prosecuting their cases to the best of their the Criminal Code, and makes a joke of this abilities will use every flaw, every poorly written Government's rhetoric on its so-called tough phrase and every unnecessary adjustment to stance on crime. I refer again to the article in the Code—like some of those I have the Australian by David Fagan, with which I mentioned today—to win their cases. Instead know the Attorney-General agrees. of helping to clarify our legal system, this The Criminal Code highlights just how Criminal Code will tie up Queensland's courts poor this Government's record on introducing for years as each of these new definitions is workable, commonsense legislation has tested through all the courts. I say to Mr become. "Inept" is a word often used when it Beattie that eminent judges have told me that, comes to legislation from this Government, and I would rather believe them than him. and it is for a very good reason. This Those judges have also told me how Government and this Cabinet is made up of absolutely despicable they thought the lawyers, former union heavies and party member was when he was an attorney. hacks. That applies to all Ministers. There is There is only one solution to this problem. hardly an ounce of commonsense among the I know that it seems impossible after five entire 18, and that is the problem. When it years, but the only answer is to throw out this comes to introducing legislation which is Criminal Code and start again. It is far better to practical, which works and which will help make sure that the new Criminal Code is rather than hinder average Queenslanders, workable before it is introduced rather than, as the Government just cannot do it. And so it is the Government is doing this week, pushing it with the Criminal Code. Instead of introducing through for purely political purposes. Surely a practical and workable Code that will even this Queensland Labor Government streamline and simplify the legal process and would not put Queensland's entire legal introduce plain English where appropriate to system in turmoil for years just to try to win the assist average people, the Attorney-General next election by flaunting a flawed Criminal has opened a Pandora's box of problems. I Code. But then, of course, I guess it would, will refer to the comments made by Rob and it has. O'Regan, QC, who, I remind members, chaired the committee that came up with the Mr DAVIES (Mundingburra) original draft in 1992. With reference to this (11.29 a.m.): Mrs Sheldon has certainly latest version of the Criminal Code put forward continued in the vein that she has been in all by the Attorney-General, Mr O'Regan said— week. She must have had a really big dose of nasty pills this week to make the comments "There is a danger the criminal law— that she has been making day in and day out. at least for an interim period—will be I would like to clarify a couple of things for Mrs uncertain." Sheldon: at the outset of her contribution this That is a very real danger. The fact is that the morning—and that is all one could call it—she Attorney-General, by meddling where it was said that the Attorney-General either shows a not needed and by rewriting the entire Criminal lot of courage or gross stupidity. Before we Code, has opened up a disastrous situation move on, I will clarify that statement. The where every criminal case and every legal Attorney-General is showing the former: he is situation covered by the Code is now open to showing a lot of courage. This is a very new legal interpretation. courageous piece legislation that has come Mr Beattie: So what? about after 98 years. The Opposition was in Government for 32 years, and it did nothing Mrs SHELDON: So what? It is going to about major reforms in this State. It certainly cost average individuals a damned fortune to did nothing about reforming the Criminal Code try to protect themselves. That is "so what". in this State, and for that, it stands Lawyers like the member will get wealthy but, condemned. A little later in that under that lot opposite, the average contribution—— Legislative Assembly 12607 15 June 1995

Mr Santoro: There have been about 60 "Dear Sir, I refer to articles by David amendments to it. Fagan today and David Fagan and Scott Mr DAVIES: I will treat the honourable Emerson last week concerning the draft member in the same way as he treats me; Criminal Code. I do hold the view that the that is, he never takes an interjection, and I will draft should be altered and in the never respond to one from him. That is the respects reported, and that further first and last response that he will get from me. explanations for the text decided upon should be given. Mr Santoro interjected. I made a number of textual criticisms Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr of the Code and of the drafting process Palaszczuk): Order! The honourable member by which it was written, and these for Clayfield might not be in the Chamber criticisms were reported. However, I do not much longer if he continues in the present wish my remarks to be taken as otherwise vein. endorsing the other comments and Mr DAVIES: Members opposite were in opinions of the journalists expressed in Government for 32 years and they did nothing those articles." about this important piece of legislation. They That is what Mr O'Regan wrote to the let it sit on the statute book for 92 years Australian yesterday. If Mr Stephan had been without a major reform, and for that they stand in the Chamber to listen to the contribution condemned. How dare Mrs Sheldon accuse from the member for Cleveland, he would not the Attorney-General of not having the guts to have ended up in the strife that he got himself take this matter forward through the into last night. consultation process, to the Cabinet and our party for its endorsement! The Attorney- I return to Mrs Sheldon, who has to learn General definitely has courage. that life is not easy. One of her party's Prime Ministers—I think it was Malcolm Fraser—said Members have alluded to what the former that life is not meant to be easy, or words to chairman of the Criminal Justice Commission, that effect. It is not. Members on this side of Mr O'Regan, has said. I wish to clarify a couple the House are not afraid to do the hard yards. of the things said yesterday. During his If difficult decisions have to be made, we will contribution last night, Mr Stephan stated— make them. As I said earlier, we have put this "During his contribution to the process out to consultation for the past five debate, the member for Cleveland saw fit years. In the 32 years while members opposite to misrepresent many statements made were in Government, they did nothing. Mrs by Mr O'Regan since he left the position Sheldon started to trivialise this debate by of chairman of the CJC. I cannot help talking about rail services, tollways, health wondering what was going through the issues and a whole range of other things, and member's mind when he made his she probably took up about five minutes doing speech. Had he spoken to Mr O'Regan in that. I will not similarly take up five minutes the last 5 or 10 minutes, or in the last day addressing her comments. All I will say is that or so, to find out what Mr O'Regan members opposite are short on detail—and actually meant in his statements, or was that was obvious from the Deputy Leader of the member trying to put his own version the Coalition's contribution—they have no of what he would like to think Mr O'Regan constructive criticism to offer, they never put was actually saying?" up any alternatives and they have no policies, as has been demonstrated in numerous Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Is the answers to questions asked of Ministers this honourable member quoting directly from a week. Government members are not afraid of Hansard of the current session? doing the hard yards. Mr DAVIES: I am quoting what was I also refer to the cowardly attack—and said, incorrectly, about the member for that is all that we can call it—of the member Cleveland last night, and I am going to clarify for Broadwater on the member for Mount that comment right now. Yesterday, the Ommaney yesterday. The member for Mount member for Cleveland tabled a letter from Mr Ommaney explained all of that last night. O'Regan, QC, which was dated yesterday. Had the member for Gympie been in the Mrs Bird: It was shameful. Chamber listening to the honourable Mr DAVIES: It was shameful. Last member's contribution, he would not have night, the member for Mount Ommaney made the accusation that he made last night. clarified that matter for the benefit of the Mr O'Regan's letter to the editor of the House, as he has done before. Mr Grice Australian stated— knows the truth of those matters, but Mr Grice 15 June 1995 12608 Legislative Assembly lived up to his form—and he has been suggested around the traps, as have been the criticised in the Courier-Mail for doing this—and names of those involved in the discussions. I used parliamentary privilege to abuse people. hope that Mr Grice volunteers all of that Mr Grice really has to learn not to abuse the information to Mr Hanson's inquiry. I bet privileges of this House. I wonder how Mr Grice honourable members one thing: I bet he does is feeling about the impending inquiry of not do that. Russell Hanson, QC. For Mr Grice's sake, I As I said, the attack on Mr Pyke was hope that he has nothing to hide with respect despicable, and Mr Pyke outlined that last to all of the information that he has received night. I have dealt with the David Fagan article about what has been referred to as Operation and now I would like to move on to discuss the Wallah. Code in a little more detail. As we are all Mr Bredhauer: Do you think Mr Grice aware, the Code was drafted nearly 100 years supports the CJC, or is he trying to undermine ago, and this piece of legislation completely it? overhauls it. The Criminal Code is a systematic Mr DAVIES: That is a good point: does collection of the State's criminal laws. Before it Mr Grice support the CJC, or is he trying to was written, courts had to base their decisions undermine it? In looking at his past history, we on the common law, a body of judges' can only say that he has been trying to decisions that had built up over countless undermine it. For the benefit of the member generations of British legal practice. The for Cook, who has raised a couple of decisions had never been codified, that is, questions, I point out that the Opposition now organised systematically. The Criminal Code seems to be saying, "We support the CJC." brought together all of the various elements of However, there is the following very important the common law that dealt with criminal qualification: subject to an independent inquiry offences. It became a model that inspired by someone qualified to be a Supreme Court those who drew up the criminal laws of other judge. States and Territories. Since the Criminal Code was written, the colonies—that is, the Mr Bredhauer: So they support it States—federated to form the Australian before the election, but what about after the nation, and nearly a century has passed. Now, election? after a thorough review by the Attorney Mr DAVIES: That is right. The General and various interest groups around parliamentary committee—and this is on the the State, a revision of the Code has been public record so I can refer to it—has made brought into line with the needs of modern certain recommendations for fine tuning the Australian society. The intention is to produce CJC, and that is what commissioner Fitzgerald legislation that is readily understandable, fair intended. He suggested that that sort of and effective. process be in the Act, and we have made The new Criminal Code will be divided into those recommendations. It is ultimately up to two sections. The first and largest part is the the Government and the Parliament to decide Criminal Code, containing all indictable—that on that. is, serious—offences. The second part will Returning to Mr Grice—I say again that I relate to summary offences. The new hope that he goes along to Russell Hanson's Summary Offences Act will contain offences inquiry and volunteers the source of his which both the Criminal Code Review information. We know that he has been Committee and State Cabinet agreed should receiving a lot of information. Everyone around remain as offences to be prosecuted before a the place can tell that he has been receiving a magistrate. The old Code contained a lot of information. He has been asking lots of category of offence called "simple offence". questions and making all sorts of accusations Under the new legislation, some of those against people in the House, which have been offences have been repealed because they subsequently disproved by the Australian are outdated. The others will be placed into Federal Police investigation which, I would like the new Summary Offences Act. Basically, this to put on the record in this House, cleared represents a major restructuring rather than a Senator Richardson. He made all sorts of change to the actual law itself. The Vagrants, accusations and abused the privileges of this Gaming and Other Offences Act will also be House, as did members in the Federal repealed. The offences contained in that Act Parliament. Those allegations have been which are still relevant to today's technology subsequently disproved by the AFP and climate will be inserted into the new investigation. But Mr Grice will not be happy summary offences Act. Other offences which with that—after all, who is the AFP? The no longer fit in with contemporary society—for source of Mr Grice's information has been example, fortune telling—will disappear from Legislative Assembly 12609 15 June 1995 our statute book. That is a commonsense postal and telegraph offences will also be approach. Putting all indictable offences into repealed because they are covered by the one statute and all summary offences into Commonwealth Telecommunications Act. another is the logical way to restructure our There are also a number of marriage, trade, criminal law. contracts and customs law offences which are Earlier, I stated that members on the covered by specific Commonwealth and/or other side of the House were not prepared to State Acts. Other sections are being removed carry out the comprehensive review of the from the Criminal Code and inserted into other Code that this Attorney-General has been State statutes. For example—and this might prepared to do. I will cite examples of some of clarify the concerns of the member for the anachronistic provisions contained in the Lockyer—the offences relating to brands will old legislation. They include: defaming a be moved to the Brands Act. This means that foreign prince; challenging to fight a duel; we will have a criminal law ready for the going dressed at night with face blackened, twenty-first century as well as a much smaller wearing slippers; unlawful processions; piracy statute book—reduced from 700-odd sections and aiding pirates; telling fortunes; advertising to 400-odd sections. I am confident that the a reward for the return of stolen property; law will be much easier to understand and find bringing fictitious action on penal statute; and more relevant to today's modern society. neglecting to aid in suppressing a riot; treason; The new Code removes the relics and inciting mutiny; defacing brands; giving false duplications but retains all offences which information about the health of foreign could still be used. ships—— I want to spend a couple of minutes on Mr FitzGerald: Defacing brands—that's the new, tougher approach that the a serious offence. Attorney-General, the Government and Government members in unison are prepared Mr DAVIES:—and assaulting persons to support. The new Criminal Code, which was protecting wrecks. Some of those offences are unveiled in August last year, features new serious, and they will obviously be retained in offences and tougher penalties. For example, the appropriate statutes. However, some of serious assault penalties have more than those offences are purely anachronistic. As I doubled from three to seven years. Where a said before, members opposite stand child under 16 or an adult over 60 is sexually condemned for criticising us when they assaulted, this will be treated as an allowed those types of ridiculous and outdated aggravating circumstance, increasing the provisions to remain in the Code. We are available sentence from seven to 14 years. A repealing those inappropriate offences. whole range of much tougher penalties is The new Code also removes outdated contained in the new Code, and I will deal with terminology and replaces it with plain English, a few more. Endangering the safety of a reflecting modern usage. A couple of person in a vehicle has gone from a penalty of comments have been made in the House this two years' imprisonment to life imprisonment. week about literacy and numeracy. Perhaps Incest by a female has gone from a penalty of that is one reason why these changes were three years' imprisonment to life imprisonment, never initiated—members opposite do have a and the penalty for stalking has increased problem with literacy and numeracy! While from three to five years' imprisonment to archaic matters will be repealed, technological seven years' imprisonment. Members opposite development has required the insertion of would not deal with the stalking issue; it was some new offences. For example, threatening left to this Government to do that. with an HIV/AIDS-infected syringe has been Some new offences include: organised included, as have new offences covering crime, which carries a penalty of 20 years; organised crime, computer hacking and unlawful computer operation, which carries a planting viruses. With chemicals being far penalty of 10 years; intent to transmit a more developed than they were 100 years serious disease or cause disfigurement—which ago, the offence of attempting to injure by I mentioned before—which carries a penalty of explosive substance has been extended to life imprisonment; cruelty to children, which cover explosive or noxious substances. carries a penalty of two years' imprisonment; A number of other offences will be and looting, which carries a penalty of 14 repealed because they are already contained years' imprisonment. Under the new Code, in other State or Federal legislation. For there is a much broader definition of "rape". example, the 15 offences in the old Code Currently, rape is defined to include only the relating to coins and counterfeiting are vagina. However, Cabinet decided that that covered by Commonwealth legislation. The 28 definition should be widened. Rape now 15 June 1995 12610 Legislative Assembly carries a penalty of life imprisonment. As well, Mr STONEMAN (Burdekin) there are the offences of serious sexual (11.49 a.m.): I agree with the sentiments assault and sexual assault, both of which carry expressed by Opposition members during this penalties of life imprisonment. All in all, in debate. In particular, I support the comments excess of 40 offences have been upgraded of the shadow Attorney-General, who will from simple offences to serious crimes, shortly be the Attorney-General of this State. including assault, indecent treatment of He asserted correctly that this Bill should be children under the age of 16, carnal withdrawn and redrafted. There should be knowledge of girls under the age of 16 and genuine public scrutiny, and the comments of abuse of intellectually impaired persons. the public should be noted—a process that The overhauled Code is more effective, has not occurred to date. Prior to its passage, efficient and up to date. The tougher penalties the legislation should be amended and new offences re-emphasise that crime accordingly. does not pay. That comment was made some People have been very keen to knock the time ago by the Attorney-General, and I agree old Code, but it has served us very well. As with it. Members opposite try to paint the with a well-running motor car, over the years picture that this Government is soft on crime. one may adjust it and tinker with it, but the Nothing could be further from the truth— basics are always there. That applies to the Mr Stoneman: Absolutely true. current Code. Not only has it served this State well but it has also been used as a model for Mr DAVIES:—as the member for other Codes around the world. Nevertheless, a Burdekin well knows. Had he been in the re-adjustment of equipment prior to final Chamber for my entire contribution, he would departure would be appropriate, and that is have heard me say that the Government has this case with the passage of this new Criminal been prepared to do the hard yards, whereas Code. members opposite were not; it is as simple as This legislation is nothing more than a that. We are introducing a new, tougher political charade. The widespread and justified Criminal Code to deal with the problems of criticism it has received has highlighted the today's society. Members opposite would not ineptitude of the Attorney-General and those do that. Before they start criticising the actions who have advised him on this legislation. I will of this Government, they should consider their not go through the very cutting and detailed own record. If members opposite are ever criticisms that have been referred to during this prepared to introduce a comprehensive law debate, but I will simply say that I think that and order policy, we would like to hear about it. As the Minister for Police stated recently, those criticisms have been unprecedented about a year ago on ABC radio Mr Cooper and that they are obviously totally justified. In was asked to outline his policy, but he did not my time in this place, I have never seen a have one. The Opposition really is a policy Minister receive so much criticism when vacuum. introducing a Bill into this Parliament. One might say that some of that criticism has been There are a number of tougher penalties over the top; nevertheless, there has been in the Code. I will summarise some of them consistent criticism of the Bill, the consultative briefly. The penalty for murder stays as processes and the ineptitude of this Minister. mandatory life imprisonment, and life There is a fast-growing perception in the sentences still apply to offences such as community that many of the actions of this manslaughter, attempted murder, rape, intent Government—and this has been highlighted to cause grievous bodily harm, robbery, by the Opposition increasingly over the past attempted robbery plus grievous bodily harm five or six years—have been based on and arson. The penalty for kidnapping has ineptitude. Recently, I caught a cab from the increased to life imprisonment, and serious airport and the taxidriver talked about the assault penalties have more than doubled. As Premier having the imprints of his knuckles on I mentioned earlier, endangering the safety of his behind. I asked him what he was getting a person in a vehicle goes from a penalty of at, because that was a term I had not heard two years' imprisonment to life imprisonment. before. He said, "Well, he has obviously been The new Criminal Code will take us into sitting on his hands for the last five years the future. I am sure that it will not take a because nothing is happening in this State." Labor Government 98 years to make changes Mr Deputy Speaker, I am sure that you have to it. The Attorney-General, Cabinet and this experienced this Government's lack of action Government will consistently update the new in your electorate, which suffers its own Criminal Code as the circumstances demand. problems that need to be addressed. Legislative Assembly 12611 15 June 1995

One need only look at today's Townsville Government members by association. I do not newspaper for proof of that inaction. People in think that that is reasonable or fair, so I will not that city who are not involved with the National damn members opposite for being party to the Party or do not have a National Party ineptitude of the Attorney-General. background are criticising the Labor Obviously, the Criminal Code is all about Government in this State, particularly the the law, so it is necessary to look at the law Minister who is the member for Townsville. and understand its importance. In the paper This Criminal Code is a desperate attempt to yesterday, I came across an article headed gain some credibility in the community and to "Life Without Law" from a book by Richard L. give Labor candidates and those members Evans titled Thoughts for One Hundred Days. I who will not be re-elected some hope of believe that excerpt is worthy of some pulling the wool over the eyes of the comment because it talks about community about this Government's supposed commandments, standards, discipline and the new tough approach to law and order. That is law. They are the four components upon part of the charade. While the Government, which any Criminal Code must be based and particularly the Premier and the Attorney- upon which any application of the law must be General, are sitting on their hands, this State founded. I quote from this article because I is going nowhere. think it is not only profound but it also makes a Mr Welford: Say something of lot of sense. It states— substance. "Among the things for which we Mr STONEMAN: I will take the should be most grateful are interjection and I will say something. commandments, standards, discipline Unfortunately, the member for Mundingburra and law. Without these there would be has left the Chamber, but I must say that his little that we could count on. Suppose attack on the member for Broadwater, in his there were no standards. Suppose that holier-than-thou delivery, was absolutely teachers, professors, acaedemic hypocritical. institutions gave us no idea what was required of us to graduate or attain a Mr Elliott: People in glass houses degree, to qualify to practice a profession. shouldn't throw stones. How would we ever know what to begin to Mr STONEMAN: The member for do, what to begin to be, or when we had Cunningham is exactly right: people in glass fulfilled requirements? houses should not throw stones. Suppose that parents gave us no Mr Welford interjected. idea what is expected of us, but simply Mr STONEMAN: The member wants to turned us loose to do anything, to act in interject further, but he should wait for my any way, honest, moral, or otherwise. reply. That attack comes from the man who Suppose that God had given us no admitted under oath that he had signed knowledge of what is expected of us—no documents which he knew to contain false purpose, no standards, no requirements, particulars. He knew that, yet he signed them. no commandments. What a loose and He admitted that under oath yet he has the helpless life it would be not to know." hide to stand up here today and attack people Before continuing, I want to make the point on this side of the Chamber for their hypocrisy that one of the problems faced by society is and for what he claimed to be false that so many of our youth do not understand statements. This member admitted under oath discipline; they do not understand the that he signed documents that he knew to be processes that they should be required to false in certain particulars. No greater level of learn at an early age to help them carry on condemnation could be levelled at any through life showing respect for persons and person. property. Unfortunately, the member for Brisbane Recently, a case came to my notice in Central is not in the Chamber. His argument which part of the Government's process that yesterday was that certain members on this should be helping people who are in trouble side of the House were consorters and had fallen down. In this case, the Department conspirators in respect of what he saw to be of Family Services, which is supposed to help the actions of previous members of the families, has not done much to prevent a 16- National Party. Well, the same damning thing year-old girl becoming involved in criminal could be said of him. What about those activity to support herself. Would honourable people Mr Grice mentioned in his very incisive members believe that this 16-year-old girl, who speech yesterday evening? That would damn has just been released from an order obtained 15 June 1995 12612 Legislative Assembly by the Department of Family Services, and The Code talks about "plain English" and, who happens also to be pregnant, legally has of course, that leads on to the issue of political her 13-year-old sister in her care? What sort of correctness, which is a part of plain English a situation is that? nowadays. In his second-reading speech, the Mrs Bird interjected. Attorney talked about dishonesty, and I think that the term "dishonesty" should be more Mr STONEMAN: But I am sure that the specifically defined. An article in the Australian member did not have to look after a 13-year- Financial Review stated— old child at the age of sixteen. We are talking about a 16-year-old pregnant girl who admits "The drift away from free speech and to being addicted to smoking and alcohol, yet towards authoritarianism has been the Department of Family Services has put her apparent for some time. As the cult of 13-year-old sister under her care. Not only political correctness—imported from the that, that 16-year-old is then paid $107-odd a United States—becomes entrenched in week to feed, comfort and house herself and the media and taxpayer funded her sister. The girl's mother received nothing institutions operating on the fringes of like that level of financial support to look after government, many potential dissenters the child. I will not go into all of the details of have been intimidated into silence. this particular case, but I will say that Only those willing to risk or circumstance like that lead to a life of a lack of impervious to being denounced as racist, discipline and of not understanding the sexist, homophobe, fascist or all of the standards or the commandments of the law. I above dare to publicly dissent from the return to the article headed "Life Without fashionable orthodoxy." Law", which states— Further on, the article stated— "One of the greatest blessings of life "Thus, an article by Professor Mary is law. Without it ownership of property Kalantiz published on May 8 and would not be possible. Safety would not supporting the Racial Hatred Bill cited be possible. Civilization would not be 1,400 odd incidents of racial violence possible. Life would scarcely be possible." 'documented' in the Moss report. Hardly Mr Welford: You cut this out of the any are in fact 'documented'. The status Trading Post, didn't you? of most is comparable to unsubstantiated gossip and some are drawn from Mr STONEMAN: Yes, I did. I saw the anonymous sources." article and I said, "What is this about?" I thought it was a very good article, which is why On ABC radio last week, Mary Kalantiz I bought the paper. called me a cruel and vicious person because I dared to suggest that a racial rally in which The article continues— she was involved could well give rise to further "Safety would not be possible. disharmony. It is interesting to note that the Civilisation would not be possible. Life first report of that so-called rally stated that would scarcely be possible. Poorly as it about 300 people were present. I understand sometimes is observed, badly as it may that there were fractionally more than 200 sometimes be abused and broken, it is there. On Monday, Mary Kalantiz and John law basically that holds us together, that Nutty of the ABC were doing a follow-up on assures pay for work, title to property, this, and at that time she claimed there were protection of person. Even the lives of the 500 people present. Where is the dishonesty? lawless would be intolerable, If this keeps up, by the end of the week it will insupportable, without law." be 5,000, and by the end of the year the And it goes on. That is a profound expression whole population of Townsville will have of what we are debating today. We cannot get attended Mary's rally. That is straight-out away from the fact that, regardless of how dishonesty, based on the principle that if "hard" the Criminal Code may ultimately turn something is said often enough it will become out to be, it will be many months before this truth. Code sees the light of day, if it ever does. I The article in the Australian Financial suspect that it will not be passed by this Review goes on to state— House; I suspect that the Government will go "The technique is not new. It became to the people on the basis that the Code has popular in central Europe about 60 years been introduced and they can vote on it. We ago. Politicians in general have been have a charade being perpetrated on the innocent of negligent dupes in the people of this State. process. But some, eager for an Legislative Assembly 12613 15 June 1995

opportunity to big note themselves, have They say that a signal needs to be sent to joined the chorus." young people that if they offend, they will have Who is the author of this article? Peter Walsh, to cop the brunt of public shame. who is probably well known to some members In a letter to me, the Ayr Chamber of as the former Federal Minister for Finance. He Commerce talks about the concern of that jumped ship because he did not like the way it chamber in respect of juvenile delinquency was going. We need to be very careful about and problems relating to personal property. throwing stones in glass houses. I see that the Enclosed in that letter was a copy of the member for Mundingburra has returned to the Innisfail Advocate which published a call by Chamber. the local Chamber of Commerce for the Where is the old order that kept people photographing of offenders. Juvenile from becoming embraced by the Criminal offenders would have their photographs Code? Where can we see the size 10 boot published as a means of stopping them from that the policemen used to apply which committing further offences. That would bring stopped people from getting into the clutches shame on them and on their families. That is of the Criminal Code, no matter whether it was the sort of thing that the community is starting amended or not. The old order supported to call for. People in the community are school discipline, and now we see the saying, "We have had enough. We need new frustration of teachers no longer able to apply weapons." The weapon of shame is discipline without running the risk of all sorts of fundamental. If we do not adopt more complaints being lodged against them. A practical measures of dealing with juvenile policeman can no longer cuff a lout—and, on crime and the often associated problems of many occasions, that is all that is needed. I do dysfunctional families, we will have to make not know how many people from all levels of the punishments provided for in the Criminal society have said to me, "If it hadn't been for Code more severe. the sergeant giving me a boot up the rear Time expired. end, I probably would have drifted off the rails Mr J. H. SULLIVAN (Caboolture) into a life of lawlessness." Children are now (12.09 p.m.): At the start of any speech I saying to their parents, "If you smack me, I will make in relation to Bills before this Parliament, go and tell the teacher and Family Services." It I usually like to spend some time rebutting the is because of this that we see the prevalence contribution of the member who speaks prior of cases such as that of the 16-year-old given to me. In this instance, that is going to be fairly the care of her 13-year-old sister which I difficult. The member for Burdekin started off mentioned earlier. It is for these reasons, promisingly enough with the comment that he among others, that we have to amend codes believed, as members on his side believe, that such as this. this Criminal Code should be withdrawn and This Code is flawed and its architect is a redrafted so that it can be adjusted—and he well published joke—and I do not mean that in used that word several times. I thought, a personal sense but in a professional sense. "Beauty! We are going to hear something All the processes applied by this Government from somebody at last." However, throughout have led to a situation in which law and order his 20-minute speech, the member for has continued to break down. No longer are Burdekin did not once suggest how this parents effectively supported in the basic Criminal Code ought to be readjusted, disciplinary process; no longer are schools adjusted or redrafted in any way. I suppose allowed to apply some of the "shame" that is just as well, because on the one processes, as I call them. One of the greatest occasion that the member for Burdekin inhibitors to bad behaviour is shame being strayed onto the subject of the Criminal brought upon the offender in front of his or her Code—and I do not say that with any peers; the principle of the dunce in the corner. disrespect to your control of the debate, Mr Some time ago, I made certain comments Deputy Speaker—he was wrong. If the which drew some ridicule but also gained a lot member for Burdekin would cast his eye ever of support. I suggested that we should so fleetingly—as the member for Everton said consider introducing things such as shame yesterday—to page 55 of the Bill before the jackets—a return to the public dunce in the House he would see proposed section 81. corner. Judges and senior policemen have Under the heading "Domestic discipline", it said to me, "If we could only bring back the quite clearly states that a parent, or a person stocks." Of course, we cannot do that in this in the place of a parent, or a teacher can use day and age, but that is what judges, reasonable correctional force towards a child in disciplinarians and people who understand that person's charge. What did the honourable what is going wrong with society are calling for. member say? He said quite the opposite. 15 June 1995 12614 Legislative Assembly

Mr Welford: He has been misleading Mr J. H. SULLIVAN: I do not mind the House. quoting Labor Lawyers, but when I do so I Mr J. H. SULLIVAN: He has proved acknowledge that I am quoting Labor lawyers. quite conclusively by touching on the Criminal I do not try to pretend that they are unbiased Code only once—and on that occasion he was when they serve on the executive of a party; wrong—that he is filibustering. that would be downright dishonest, but that is the tactic that the Deputy Leader of the Mr Stoneman: What are you doing? Coalition, the Leader of the Liberal Party and the member for Caloundra uses time and time Mr J. H. SULLIVAN: I am talking again in this Parliament. There is no need for about the honourable member's contribution. the honourable member to shake his head. This process is called debate—something He defends those tactics. about which the honourable member would know nothing. Mr FitzGerald: You're wrong. We didn't pass him off as—— Let me consider the member's suggestion that this Parliament will not pass the Criminal Mr J. H. SULLIVAN: Oh, yes she did. Code. He would not take up the challenge to The honourable member should get the withdraw from the speaking list all the names Hansard and read it. Mrs Sheldon used the of Opposition members; we would withdraw words "unbiased critics". our speakers so that we could pass the Code. Mrs Sheldon also dealt with the matter of Why would he not take that interjection and indictable offences being dealt with summarily. take up that challenge? Quite clearly, That fairly interesting matter has been brought honourable members opposite are up by a number of speakers; but I think Mrs filibustering. The Opposition Police and Sheldon went even further than most. As far Corrective Services spokesman admits that as I could tell, her comments constituted an the Opposition is beating up law and order in attack on the courts; they constituted a this State. That was stated in a document scurrilous vote of no confidence in the tabled this morning. That is what the magistracy. The vast majority of the Opposition is doing: beating it up. Opposition magistracy were appointed by the previous members do not have a clue. Government. If magistrates cannot be trusted with responsibilities, why did the previous I was fairly interested in that little story Government put them there in the first place? about the taxi driver and the comment that the Premier had knuckle imprints on his backside Let me talk about the jurisdiction of the from sitting on his hands. I thought that was courts for just a moment. I do not think that really quite funny. Taking into account the Opposition members understand what this is contribution made by the member for Burdekin about. Time and time again during this in this place this morning, I will leave it to the debate, members of the Opposition have imagination of honourable members and spoken about the abolition of the right to trial readers of Hansard as to which part of his own by jury. Nothing of the sort is included in this anatomy Mr Stoneman will leave his hand legislation. The lengthy quotation from the marks on. Probably the one positive thing that Law Society which was read into Hansard by Mr Stoneman said was that he acknowledges the Opposition spokesman—obviously that some of the criticism of this Bill is over the because he cannot write his own speeches— top. acknowledged that there are already a vast number of offences in this State for which I turn to the contribution of the Deputy people are not given the automatic right to trial Leader of the Coalition and member for by jury. Each year, somewhere between Caloundra, Mrs Sheldon. She cited a number 23,000 and 25,000 of those offences are drug of supposedly unbiased critics of the Criminal related, and in those cases the prosecutor Code. For example, she cited the Law Society, makes the decision as to whether there should which represents the professionals; the be a trial by jury. Because the District Court Council for Civil Liberties, which seems to cannot hear matters relating to drug offences, ordinary Queenslanders to represent the rights what would happen to the Supreme Court if of criminals; and Mr Michael Quinn, who was just 10 per cent of those defendants elected on the O'Regan committee that did the first to have their cases heard by a jury in the draft. Michael Quinn is the Liberal Party's idea Supreme Court? Each year, there would be an of an unbiased critic. He served on the Liberal additional 2,500 trials by juries; the place Party executive. Unbiased? You beauty! would collapse. Mr FitzGerald: You quote the Labor In relation to the jurisdiction of courts as Lawyers as well. outlined in this Criminal Code—there is now a Legislative Assembly 12615 15 June 1995 broader range of offences with which a UK, their spiritual homeland, the sacred magistrate can deal. In every instance, the ground for them—— decision as to whether a case will be heard in Mr Johnson: Have you got a the Magistrates Court or in a higher court is homeland? made by the magistrate. At present, a magistrate makes some of those decisions, Mr J. H. SULLIVAN: Yes, I do. It is the prosecution makes some and, in some called Australia. cases, the defence makes that decision. But Mr Johnson: You're one of the that is not all; there is also a protection in the indigenous people—— Code. The claims made by Opposition Mr J. H. SULLIVAN: Sir, if you know members—particularly the Opposition the difference between currency and sterling, I spokesman, Mr Beanland—that this could am currency. In Queensland, under the new mean that people who have committed very Code, it will be possible to elect trial by jury serious crimes could be gaoled for only two and the opportunity to obtain a trial by jury in years represent another outrageous assault Queensland will be greater than it will be in on the integrity of the magistracy. Magistrates other places. will determine whether, in the circumstances of the cases before them, the penalty is likely to The member for Caloundra almost be severe or minor. If a magistrate feels that succeeded in bringing me to tears with her the penalty is likely to be severe, surely story about backdoor euthanasia. She did that members opposite would believe that that because, in common with some other people magistrate has enough integrity and sense to who have contributed to this debate to whom I refer that case to a higher court. If a will refer shortly, she served on the Committee magistrate should elect to hear that case of Subordinate Legislation. People who have against the wishes of the defendant, that served on that committee should have a defendant has an automatic right of appeal. better understanding of the interpretation of Practically, what are we going to achieve? Acts of Parliament and regulations than other Recently, three days of District Court sittings members in the Parliament—and I say this were taken up with hearing a case about the without any disrespect to my colleagues—who stealing of a single plant. Three days of tend to be more concerned with outcome than expensive court time was taken up hearing a with process. She said that that particular case about stealing a single plant. provision is a backdoor euthanasia clause. She needs to understand that a court, when Mr FitzGerald interjected. interpreting this Code, will take into account a Mr J. H. SULLIVAN: And the Privy great deal of material. Part of the material that Council went the way of the penny, too. it takes into account—as Mr FitzGerald knows quite well—is the Parliament's intent. The court Other cases that have come before the needs to do that only if it feels that the clause District Court in recent times include being in is confusing. The intent of this Parliament possession of a cockroach zapper believed to shows quite clearly to the court, particularly have been stolen. Should we remove 12 with the document tabled by the Attorney at people from their workplaces to hear the the commencement of this debate, that the evidence on a case such as that? What about clause in no way, shape or form deals with or a charge of wilful damage to a paper cup? legalises euthanasia. Members opposite would want a trial by jury for a case involving wilful damage to a paper The saddest thing for the entire cup. They are crazy. The provisions in this population of this State is to see Mrs Sheldon Criminal Code do not abolish the right to trial stand up in this place. Mrs Sheldon brought so by jury; they ensure that the courts' resources much hope to women in the State when she are used in the best, most efficient and most became the first female political leader in the economical way so that the people of this State's history by being elected to the State are not paying outrageous sums of leadership of the Liberal Party; at last, women money for courts to hear cases such as that were going to have a true voice in involving wilful damage to a paper cup. Queensland. Let us talk about the voice that they have. Mrs Sheldon quite clearly sides with From the way in which members opposite the lawyers against the women of this State. have been carrying on during this debate, Her comments here today indicate that she people would think that this was the only place opposes the Women's Coalition on the in the world where things of this nature are question of corroboration. Mrs Sheldon occurring. What poppycock! Members have believes that a judge in this State should warn heard the republic debate and the utterings of a jury that it is dangerous to convict a person the Anglophiles opposite; this happens in the on the uncorroborated evidence of a 15 June 1995 12616 Legislative Assembly complainant. I am referring to some of the a Persil-white conscience. However, in an most savage offences that occur in this State. article in the Bulletin dated 6 June, O'Regan That is an outstanding insult from Mrs Sheldon said that people should have been to all women in this State. She ought to be prosecuted. ashamed. The women of Queensland had Mr Davies: Who was the counsel invested so much hope in her. Do honourable assisting during that period? members remember the articles that appeared in Women's Weekly and other women's Mr J. H. SULLIVAN: Mr O'Regan was magazines when this woman rose through counsel assisting. the—not terribly numerous—ranks of the Mr FitzGerald: Ken McElligott wants to Liberal Party to the top? It was a new age for make a statement, too. women in Queensland. A new age, indeed! She is more paternalistic than the blokes on Mr J. H. SULLIVAN: No, he does not. that side. She has more interest in being part Mr FitzGerald: We'll give him leave if of the boys' club than she has in representing he wants to make one. The Leader of the women in this State. That is a disgrace. House, too; we'll give him leave. In common with other members opposite, Mr J. H. SULLIVAN: Will you shut your Mrs Sheldon raised the Rob O'Regan cakehole so I can use my last four minutes? A question. Yes, Rob O'Regan has made some number of speakers in this debate, including criticisms of this Code. The Government the member for Indooroopilly, Mr accepts criticism. We do not necessarily agree Beanland—and I do not wish to quote with it, but we accept it. But let me ask the anybody directly—said words to the effect that honourable member: is Rob O'Regan always we should get back to a draft of the Criminal right? Code which is closer to the O'Regan draft. Mr Davies: Ask Allan Grice. In the minutes that I have available, I will Mr J. H. SULLIVAN: I will ask Allan refer to that draft. The O'Regan draft of the Grice and Neil Turner. Neither of them is going Criminal Code recommended that provocation to answer. be open as a defence in personal violence Mr Johnson: You tell us. offences, such as manslaughter and grievous bodily harm. That would be widening that Mr J. H. SULLIVAN: As a famous defence. In some ways, it already exists. For football commentator in Queensland used to example, provocation can reduce a murder say quite regularly, I'll tell you what—if Rob charge to a charge of manslaughter. However, O'Regan was always right, there should have the O'Regan draft would have given carte been prosecutions of a great number of blanche to the use of provocation as a people sitting on that side of the Parliament defence. I am not surprised that the members today—— opposite would support that, because through Mr Johnson: Name them. their gun policy they support providing every Mr J. H. SULLIVAN: I am not going to Queenslander with a licence to kill. So I am name them. That was over the so-called travel not surprised that they would support rorts. provocation as a defence carte blanche. Mr Johnson: What about on your side? Mr O'Regan's draft did not even consider the offence of organised crime. Since the Mr J. H. SULLIVAN: I am not saying, preparation of his draft, former judge Carter but I ask: is he right? has made his recommendations on organised Mr FITZGERALD: I rise to a point of crime as a result of Operation Trident. Mr order. I have been asked to say whether Mr O'Regan is critical of the organised crime O'Regan is right. I have received a letter from provisions. They were not in his draft. They the Taxation Department and from the CJC to were not in his draft probably because that say that I have no case to answer whatsoever. draft preceded Operation Trident. I received a full refund of my tax. I was one of Mr O'Regan recommended no mandatory those members named in the report to which life sentences—no mandatory gaol sentences. the honourable member refers. I received a After the bleatings that we have heard from full refund from the Taxation Department. the members opposite over this Government Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr being soft on crime, they do not want people Palaszczuk): Order! There is no point of order. sent to gaol for life. How many times have The member for Caboolture may continue. they complained when a person who is serving Mr J. H. SULLIVAN: I acknowledge a life sentence is released after 17 and a half that the red-headed member for Lockyer has years? Legislative Assembly 12617 15 June 1995

Mr Johnson: Who said that? and question whether this type of clause that Mr J. H. SULLIVAN: The honourable is contained in the Bill could be made to cover member does that all the time. In the O'Regan those events. It is common knowledge that, draft, the penalties for a small number of on 2 October 1992, Mr Carter was engaged by offences were increased. Our draft, the draft the Criminal Justice Commission to undertake that we are debating today, contains a wide the Joh jury inquiry. One of the major terms of range of increased penalties. If honourable reference was whether any person employed members opposite do not want them, I say to in the Sheriff's Office or in the Centre for them that what they have been saying to Information Technology and Government members for quite some months Communications—that is CITEC—improperly is true: the community wants perpetrators disclosed confidential information concerning punished. The vast majority of the O'Regan any juror who was subsequently empanelled draft has been adopted. The section on on the Bjelke-Petersen trial. Other matters mental illness in the O'Regan draft has been were also contained in the terms of reference. adopted. In relation to assault, the new draft They were the major terms of reference in does not differ substantially—— relation to the Joh jury inquiry. Without talking about the man's obvious bias, I again point Time expired. out the fact that Mr Carter, QC, was engaged Hon. N. J. TURNER (Nicklin) by the Criminal Justice Commission on 2 (12.29 p.m.): At the outset, I state my October 1992. On page 476 of his voluminous opposition to this ill-conceived legislation. I join report, he stated— with former CJC Chairman, Rob O'Regan, the "Finally, I need only add that the Queensland Law Society and many other evidence of Jennifer Jane Kerry Smith concerned people who believe that the Bill is and the report of Inspector Huddlestone, totally unworkable. The amendments dated 11 December 1991 to the Criminal proposed by the Attorney-General will not Justice Commission, is relied upon to make the law simple. One hundred years of support the finding that there was no case law will no longer apply and each section manipulation of the random jury selection will largely have to be retested. In fact, lawyers system with the Centre for Information who fail to test those sections on behalf of Technology and Communications their client will be negligent. (CITEC)." I am totally and diametrically opposed to I just ask members to think about the dates to those clauses of the Bill that allow euthanasia which I have referred. The Criminal Justice to be practised in Queensland. That Commission went to Mr Carter when he was opposition has been stated by a number of conducting an investigation into Operation other people, including Mr O'Regan and Trident, in which the CJC had been mentioned Denver Beanland. It is an area of extreme in the terms of reference and could have been concern to me and to many other people painted in a light that was not complimentary throughout the length and breadth of of the CJC. Mr Carter, QC, could have made Queensland. Legislation such as that should any type of finding. Yet the CJC went to him not be introduced by stealth. If it is to be and said, "When you have concluded the introduced, it should by debated properly and investigation into Operation Trident, in which members should be allowed a conscience we are mentioned in the terms of reference, vote. we will offer you the job to start the inquiry into I would like to refer briefly to the the Joh jury on big money." I think that is second-reading speech of the Minister. With scandalous. On 11 December 1991, Mr reference to Chapter 4, he stated— Carter, QC, and the CJC knew that there had ". . . the Bill deals with public order been no interference with CITEC because offences. The major advance in this area Inspector Huddlestone is a senior police deals with abuse of office by public inspector assigned to the CJC, and he carried officers. The offence no longer just covers out an investigation that showed that there officers of the public service but it is had been no interference with CITEC. extended to include all statutory office I would like to touch briefly on some other holders, from Ministers of the Crown to matters that I believe are of extreme concern clerks in local authorities." and should be covered by this legislation. The previous speaker, the member for Firstly, I refer to the ministerial statement on Caboolture, Mr Sullivan, spoke about Mr the Senate Select Committee on Unresolved Carter, QC, and Operation Trident. I would like Whistleblower Cases by the Attorney-General, to touch briefly on what transpired at that time in which he stated— 15 June 1995 12618 Legislative Assembly

"The inquiry is unnecessary, because "I think that probably is a fair the allegations raised by Lindeberg and summary." Mr Harris"— In relation to the destruction of such and that related, of course, to the shredding of evidence, section 129 of the Criminal Code the Heiner documents and to Harris' states— allegations about Huey— "Any person who, knowing that any "have already been exhaustively book, document, or other thing or any examined by the C.J.C. and, in the case kind, is or may be required in evidence in of Harris, also by the Parliamentary a judicial proceeding, wilfully destroys it or Criminal Justice Committee." renders it illegible or undecipherable or I point out that I brought down a dissenting incapable of identification, with intent report in relation to that matter. I dissented thereby to prevent it from being used in from the findings because I believed then, and evidence, is guilty of a misdemeanour, I continue to believe, that there had been no and is liable for imprisonment for three thorough investigation into those matters. years." I find it interesting to note that at the I could refer to other sections if any Senate Select Committee into Unresolved member was interested. In relation to the Whistleblower cases held on Monday evening, Minister saying that those issues had been 29 May 1995—only several days ago—the properly and thoroughly investigated and that former Labor lawyer who is employed by the the Huey matter, arising from Harris' Criminal Justice Commission, Mr Barnes, allegations, had been investigated, it is interesting to note that, when questioned on stated in that investigation— Monday, 29 May 1995, by the Senate Select "There is no doubt that the Committee into Unresolved Whistleblower documents were destroyed at a time Cases, Mr Le Grand, the Director of the Official when the Cabinet well knew that Coyne Misconduct Division of the CJC, informed that wanted access to them. No doubt about committee that the CJC had not investigated that at all." the complaints against Detective Senator Abetz said— Superintendent Huey. That is a total contradiction to what the Minister has been "There is no doubt about that in your saying for some considerable time. mind?" I believe that it is worth noting that the Mr Barnes said— Attorney-General and Cabinet refused to "No sir." assist the Senate inquiry because it could Senator Abetz said,— expose criminal offences committed by the Cabinet, particularly in relation to the "The Cabinet knew that Coyne shredding of the Heiner documents. wanted the documents." Previously, I referred to Chapter 4 which was Barnes said— referred to in the Minister's second-reading "I am confident that is the case." speech and which covers these very serious matters. Barnes goes on further to state— The member for Mundingburra in his "Coyne's solicitors threatened contribution spoke about the CJC, Operation Matchett with action about the Wallah, Mr Richardson and the continuing secondment. He has previously support for the CJC. The Attorney-General has threatened action in relation to also referred to my resignation as Deputy defamation and prerogative writs for Chairman of the Parliamentary Criminal Justice natural justice." Committee and my statement that the people Senator Abetz states further— of Queensland would be better served by an "What seems to have occurred then Upper House of Parliament than an ongoing is that with the potential threat of the royal commission. Let me say that I will give those people from both sides of the House defamation suit, Cabinet decided, yes lets and those members of the Parliamentary shred them because they are of no Criminal Justice Committee, past and present, historical value, but knowing full well that it an "out". Seventy-five per cent of the people I may be the material evidence on which a potential litigant would rely to pursue or have spoken to in this place from all sides of prosecute his case." the House have indicated to me that they believe that the CJC should not be an ongoing Barnes stated— organisation that continues to gather power Legislative Assembly 12619 15 June 1995 and they believe that at some time it should and they were all secured as quickly as be wound down. possible in a central location." Another matter that I want to raise—and it In conclusion No. 6, on page 34, the has been raised already, but it covers what is committee stated— embodied in the legislation—is the Criminal "The Commission failed to inform the Justice Commission's inquiry into the leaking Parliamentary Committee that copies of of the November 1993 documents and its the November 1993 monthly report could report that was tabled in this House on 4 not be 'accounted for'. Comments made August 1994, which was a unanimous report by Commission officers at the joint of the whole of the Parliamentary Criminal meeting on 14 February 1994, left the Justice Committee. I refer to Ms Theresa Parliamentary Committee with the clear Hamilton's evidence before the parliamentary impression that all CJC copies of the committee on 12 April 1994, in which she report had been located. A further stated— impression conveyed to the Committee by "It was necessary in this paragraph the Commission was that any failure to (paragraph 7 of the Statement in Support adequately pursue the investigation fell of the Notice) to show that the on Inspector Bull. Commission was investigating a matter Subsequent evidence presented to within jurisdiction, and I considered it the Parliamentary Committee shows appropriate to indicate that the unequivocally that these impressions were Commission's investigation at that stage false. At least some Commission officers was whether or not any of the present at the meeting on 14 February Commission's reports had been 1994 were aware that copies of the improperly released by a member of the November 1993 monthly report could not PCJC. Members of the PCJC, being be 'accounted for', however, none of members of Parliament, are holders of these officers made any attempt to dispel appointments in units of public the false impression created. The administration and, therefore within the Parliamentary Committee considers this Commission's jurisdiction to investigate in silence was inappropriate. It further relation to acts which could amount to demonstrated an apparent lack of official misconduct." commitment by the Commission to be And this is an interesting point— accountable to the Parliamentary "Although it was clear at the time I Committee and through the Committee to drafted the Statements in Support and the Parliament and people of the Notice that the report may have been Queensland." released by a member of the There is much more in that report, which I Commission, in my view the Commission's would recommend to anyone for perusal. It jurisdiction to investigate was more clearly indicates how the Parliamentary Criminal founded on suspected official misconduct, Justice Committee has operated over time. which would not apply to an investigation In the short time available to me, I will of the Commission's own staff." quote not my own words but those of other So the CJC, in the advice that it gave at that eminent people not just in Queensland but time to Mr Callinan, QC, was prepared to throughout Australia in relation to ongoing- mislead the court. This is on page 35 of the type royal commissions and their associated report. problems. Mr Bob Greenwood, QC, and Mr At a meeting on 14 February—and this is Gundelach, barrister at law, wrote to the all in the document that was released to the Premier on 7 February 1992. Their letter is 12 public—a commission officer made the pages long, so it would be ridiculous to try to following comment— read it all. They stated— ". . . I might mention the aspect of ". . . in so far as the CJC and the Office of collecting the reports. The same action the Special Prosecutor are concerned"— was taken in respect of all Commission of course, the Office of Special Prosecutor no employees who had copies of that report, longer exists— as with members of the Committee. There was no discrimination between anybody. "it is stressed that these should have There were a number of copies of the been considered as emergency measures report in existence. For example, every and that the time is now appropriate for director had one. They were all collected, them to be disbanded. 15 June 1995 12620 Legislative Assembly

We submit that it is inappropriate and particular with respect to the Costigan indeed dangerous to the liberty of the commission. However, the comments are individual to allow them to continue for the appropriate to the CJC and to any other following reasons:— commission. With reference to Mr Hawke, (i) The administration of the Frank Galbally's autobiography states— criminal law in other than emergency "The Prime Minister, Mr Hawke, situations can be effectively strongly criticised the Costigan managed by a traditional police/DPP Commission for identifying people by type arrangement. name in the published volumes of its (ii) For emergency situations, the report. Mr Hawke described this as a individual State Governments have serious breach of civil liberties and stated access to the National Crime that it was only with considerable Authority which under constructive reluctance that the Government was and energetic leadership can be a forced, because of unavoidable political most effective organisation." considerations, to leave most of the names in. The Government believed that I will conclude with the part of that letter which no person should be named in public as stated— having committed or as being suspected "(vi) We would respectfully suggest of having committed offences, unless duly that the emergency in Queensland is convicted in a court of law. To do so over and the perpetration of the CJC, would be to make a mockery of the long- in effect a permanent ongoing Royal standing principle of the presumption of Commission, is simply unjustified." innocence before conviction and of the I might point out that Mr Greenwood was also due protections otherwise afforded to a Labor Lawyer. citizens." I have a copy of Mr Wran's address to the A barrister serving as the then secretary to the Evatt Foundation on Friday, 29 April 1994, in Victorian Council for Civil Liberties, Mr Brian which he stated— Keon-Cohen, said— "It is a great pity that there are not "Costigan had taken on three or four more people in Australia imbued with the centuries of respect for natural justice and Doc's immoveable conviction that our the assumption of innocence. Costigan hard earned civil liberties should be has come to the view that the balance of defended at all costs. On the contrary, too public interest lies in successfully pursuing many of us in this country seem willing to a target rather than retaining the principle jettison our civil liberties under the guise of of natural justice." the maintenance of law and order. These I would like to think that the following words people, some judges, some politicians, were mine, but they are not. Everyone should some self professed 'do gooders' play on consider these comments. It is the best-put- the natural public resentment of criminal together wording that I have seen in relation to activity and the public's desire to see what is happening in this country today, and it wrongdoers adequately punished, to shift should be of concern to each and every the responsibility for the administration of member. The comments relate to the justice away from the Courts and into the Costigan royal commission and are contained hands of special purpose tribunals like in the autobiography of Australia's leading ICAC and CJC which are endowed with criminal lawyer, Frank Galbally. He said— special powers at the expense of the civil "The Costigan Commission serves to rights of people summoned to appear. demonstrate the dangers of giving people It is well known (or it ought to be well absolute power; of giving them a licence known) that from the moment it was to roam wild and secretly investigate mooted I thought—and said—that the persons whom, for one reason or another, ICAC legislation is a disgrace." they suspect of being involved in the He went on further to brand them as being perpetration of some offence or whom bread and butter circuses. I do not have time they merely seek to bring down because to quote all of that statement by Mr Wran, who they view them as 'tall poppies'. For to is a QC and was a Labor Premier of New allow royal commissions, particularly those South Wales. enquiring into criminal matters, to wield such unbridled powers—powers removed I will quote what Bob Hawke said in from any constraint of basic fairness or relation to ongoing-type royal commissions, in civil liberty—will, of necessity, erode the Legislative Assembly 12621 15 June 1995

fundamental principles on which our debate on the changes to the Criminal Code system of justice is based: a system of by introducing red herrings. which we made be jealously proud for it The volume of reported crime has allows natural justice and fairness for all increased. That is because there are better and ensures that every member of our reporting methods than ever before. Those democracy is judged by the only proper statistics are being reported to the community. instruments of the administration of We do not try to hide them. Nowadays, the justice; namely, the courts of law." media is reporting more crime statistics than My attitude on the matter has be questioned. I ever before. When I was young, there were am not speaking on behalf of the National basically two or three news services, the major Party; but I have enough courage in my one being that broadcast on ABC radio. In convictions to say what I believe, and I have those days, there was no such thing as indicated that I think that this State would be television news broadcasts. These days, a better served even by an Upper House than news item on crime may be televised at by having an ongoing-type royal commission 6 a.m., 7 a.m., 9 a.m., 11.30 a.m., 5 p.m., that, in many cases, is not answerable to the 6 p.m., 7 p.m. and then the story is repeated committee or the Parliament that appointed it. at 11 p.m. that same day. Because crime is Mr Welford: You're looking for a being reported more often, people have sinecure, are you? formed the impression that it is occurring more frequently. Mr TURNER: I do not resile from my position. I have said that before. Honourable I cite the example of fatal motor members can make their own contributions to accidents. Most people believe that more road the debate. The legislation before the House deaths occur today than occurred in the past. is ill conceived. It will not serve the purpose That is because they often see graphic intended by the Attorney-General. I oppose pictures of horrendous and tragic road deaths the legislation. on their TV screens. People probably do not Mr CAMPBELL (Bundaberg) realise that in fact the number of road deaths (12.48 p.m.): I should comment on the in Queensland peaked in the early seventies sincerity of the member for Nicklin with respect at 700 and that the number is now down to to his comments about committees of inquiry. 400. Despite that fact, most members of the public feel that the high number of road I believe a lot of the things that he said; deaths experienced two decades ago still individuals have lost their rights. It is up to us occurs today. That perception of the public as members of Parliament to ensure that we can be attributed to the more frequent protect the rights of individuals. reporting of these events by the media. I support the Criminal Code Bill. It is very important that we understand the thrust of the I turn to sentencing. Under the new Code, proposed Criminal Code, that is, to make the tougher penalties are provided. Under the law easier to understand and to set tougher separation of powers, it is up to the courts to penalties. In attempting to make the Code impose those penalties. This Government has easier to understand, the Government has successfully appealed against a greater adopted the KISS concept. For the benefit of number of lenient sentences than any other members of the Opposition, I point out that Government. That fact should be "KISS" stands for "keep it simple, stupid". For acknowledged. Enforcement is a matter for the benefit of the "stupids" opposite, I point the police, and I am certain that that debate out that we could not have made it any will continue for a long time. simpler. The Code addresses a very complex Some groups have criticised the changes area of law. contained in the new Code, including the Bar The contributions of members of the Association. I am unaware of a court case in Opposition have not addressed the legislation which both sides were in agreement. Conflict associated with the proposed Criminal Code. will always occur, and that is a feature of our Firstly, they have referred to the issue of crime adversarial judicial system. I believe that some and the question of whether it is out of control, of the criticisms of the Bar Association and which I will examine. Secondly, honourable others can be put down to a bit of laziness on members opposite mixed up the aspect of their behalf. Of course, every legal practitioner sentencing with regard to penalties. Thirdly, is familiar with the sections of the current many honourable members opposite spoke Code. They know that a certain offence is about enforcement and police numbers, which covered by section 263, 261, or whatever the has little to do with this legislation. The case may be. The new Code assigns different Opposition has attempted to muddy the numbers to existing and new offences. In 15 June 1995 12622 Legislative Assembly some instances the law has been home of another person. Such behaviour is reinterpreted, but that is to be expected since not unlawful or violent—— our system of law is based on case law and Mr Pearce: Making suggestions. precedents. The Bar Association and other groups must be prepared to make the effort to Mr CAMPBELL: Yes. It is not what become familiar with the new Code. The three people say, it is how they say it. It is difficult to matters that I have mentioned thus far have deal with such behaviour. The remedy is not been overlooked by the Opposition during this contained in the Criminal Code. In such debate. instances, people probably have to resort to civil action. However, this problem has been As a member of Parliament, one is often canvassed with me on a number of occasions, approached by people who have been but I do not know how it can be overcome. charged with various offences. Often, it is very The new Criminal Code has clear difficult to solve the problems facing those provisions relating to the dangerous use of people. It is almost impossible to ensure that vehicles. Opposition members need to everyone is treated fairly. Whatever changes appreciate that this provision is more clearly are made to the Criminal Code, we cannot defined in the new Code than it is in the guarantee that every person will be treated present Code. Have members opposite read equally before the law. That is a fact of life, the old Code? If they can follow it easily, they and no legislation will overcome that problem. have my congratulations! I contend that Recently, I was presented with a difficult case people who spend an hour or so perusing the which no legislation could resolve. A young new Code gain a better grasp of its provisions fellow was involved a bar brawl—a brawl that than they would were they to refer to the he did not start. He defended himself. Because the other party involved in the fight present Code. Under the present Code, one with this fellow was the first to lay a complaint, must refer to a series of amendments and various sections. The present Code is the police charged this fellow. The existence of reminiscent of the Standing Orders of this the CJC has meant that, even if doubt exists Parliament, which urgently need updating. and the police are not certain of the facts of a certain case, charges must be laid. No-one Mr Johnson: Can you follow them? can deny that that is occurring. I believe that Mr CAMPBELL: No; they are very this fellow is genuine. He merely defended difficult to follow. himself, but now he has to cop the charges Although to some extent dangerous simply because the other person made a driving has been clarified and harsher complaint first. That type of problem will never penalties have been imposed, a change in be overcome, but I am aware that such cases attitude still needs to occur. I believe that a do occur. This unfortunate fellow has very little death caused by dangerous driving is as money, but he must now defend himself serious as a death caused by somebody against those charges. In such cases, the pulling a trigger. Until the views of the public families of the people involved are subjected shift to that way of thinking, a high level of to enormous stress. road carnage will still occur. The number of One would have thought that during this road deaths will be lowered not so much debate Opposition members would have through clarification of the Criminal Code but made wider reference to the actual provisions through a change in attitude. of the new Criminal Code. In reality, during I turn to the right to trial. The contribution their contributions most Opposition members by the Opposition spokesman contained some have not referred to the Criminal Code itself. interesting inconsistencies on this topic. He I turn to stalking. This is a difficult issue. referred to the Magna Carta, which provides The Goss Government took responsible action that— in an attempt to prevent stalking. Many female ". . . no free man shall be taken and victims of stalking have pointed out to me that, imprisoned . . . or outlawed or exiled . . . to constitute an offence of stalking, a person's except by the lawful judgment of his behaviour must be unlawful and intended to peers . . ." do harm. Some women have told me that, However, prior to quoting that passage the although they may not be able to say that a Opposition spokesman stated that exceptions certain person has been violent to them, that to the right to trial are already provided for person has been a real nuisance. People can under the present law. Concerns have been make a real nuisance of themselves by expressed about the new provisions relating to making constant telephone calls to another the right to trial. That right is not being taken person or frequently driving or walking past the away. The fact is that people still have the Legislative Assembly 12623 15 June 1995 right of appeal. However, that in itself presents the debate, particularly that of the member for problems for me. Poor people who are entitled Caboolture. He referred to the record of some to legal aid will have their appeal paid for; rich of the members of this Parliament, which I find people will be able to afford to appeal; but low- despicable. income earners—ordinary people—may not be Mr T. B. Sullivan: They were able to afford to appeal. despicable records, weren't they? An appeal against the decision of a Mr JOHNSON: I believe that the actions magistrate to deal with a matter summarily will of the member for Caboolture were cost approximately $1,500 because a special despicable. All members who found brief will have to be prepared and counsel will themselves in trouble in the past, whether they have to be engaged. At that stage, the were convicted or exonerated, have paid the ordinary person will probably say, "I cannot supreme penalty. I think that enough is afford that money. I will just have to go along enough. That applies to members on both with the decision of the magistrate." I have sides of this House and to members of other seen many cases in which people charged Parliaments throughout this nation. It is about with minor offences such as a traffic time some Government members grew up infringement are restricted in defending their and got on with life. Some of those members case due to a lack of funding. who were convicted will wear the scars to their Although it is acknowledged that every graves. I think it is time that we got on with person cannot be treated equally, we are what we are here for, that is, representing the doing our best to provide that equality. This people of Queensland. This Government Government has implemented certain aspects should be trying to provide honest and of its criminal justice program—it has simplified reasonable government—accountable the procedures of the courts, and it has government, as the Premier referred to it in established a $4m Public Trustee Program. I 1989. After the State election this year, a believe that these measures go a long way to Borbidge-led Government will be accountable ensuring that more people are treated equally and it will address the needs of all before the law. Queenslanders, not just some Queenslanders, I support the new Criminal Code. I know as is the case now. that some people have objections to it, but the Under the Criminal Code, the police are Code had to be overhauled because of the responsible for enforcing the law. We can changes in case law and the establishment of have whatever Criminal Code we like, but if the precedents. I believe that this will be seen as police force has its hands tied, it will be very an historic event in the history of the Criminal difficult indeed for the police to apprehend Code of Queensland. criminals. This Government has not been fair Sitting suspended from 1.01 to 2.30 p.m. to the police in this State. I know that under Mr JOHNSON (Gregory) (2.30 p.m.): In Russell Cooper's leadership, the Police Service will have the powers necessary to enforce the rising to speak to the Criminal Code, I want to law, and that the National Party Government refer to a couple of very contentious and will revise this Criminal Code and give it some pertinent aspects of it because I feel that, teeth so that the criminals of this State pay the owing to the likely length of this debate and the Government's past methods and supreme sacrifice for their actions. procedures, we might see the debate Just before the luncheon recess, the guillotined. Just prior to the luncheon recess, member for Bundaberg said that Opposition the member for Nicklin said that this is an members were stupid in opposing this unworkable piece of legislation. The point that legislation. The honourable member is also I want to make is that there has been a lack of saying that Rob O'Regan, who had a fair bit to scrutiny by the general public; there has not say about this legislation because he is been enough input by the Law Society; and, opposed to certain aspects of it, the Law as the former Chairman of the CJC, Mr Rob Society and the general public of this State O'Regan, said, there are areas that still have are stupid. Gee, there must be a lot of stupid not been addressed. However, the legislation people out there! I find those remarks made is before the House today. Through the lack of by the member for Bundaberg a little unfair; I full and proper consultation, the Attorney- thought that he would have had a bit more General has ridden roughshod over the respect for the views of the majority of people general public and his colleagues in the Law in this State. Society. I want to refer to "Division 3—Rape and I want to refer to a couple of matters other sexual assaults" on page 69 of the raised in some of the contributions earlier in Criminal Code and the sentencing in regard to 15 June 1995 12624 Legislative Assembly those offences. I hope that the Attorney- will address it. It is a very serious crime and General takes notice of this. The Criminal something needs to be done about it Code says that the maximum penalty for rape immediately. is life imprisonment. As far as I am concerned, Yesterday, the Opposition spokesman, Mr the penalty should be mandatory life Beanland, gave a very full account of his imprisonment. Rape is a despicable crime. understanding of this piece of legislation. The majority of people in this State who are Another problem that I see with this legislation affected by rape are women. That crime is is that there are many instances in which despicable; it is unforgivable. I believe that maximum sentences are mentioned, but there rape is the worst crime that can possibly be is no mention of minimum sentences. The committed in our society. It is worse than crime of rape, which I have just mentioned, murder because the victims of rape carry the attracts a maximum sentence of life scars of that rape for the rest of their lives. imprisonment. That could mean 20 years' There should be no reckoning for the people imprisonment or, if they are good boys, they who commit that crime. When they are might be let out after five years. That is a nice convicted, they should be locked up and the how do you do! It is totally unacceptable. key should be thrown away. I would like to see There is no mention of minimum sentences in mandatory life imprisonment apply to that this Code. I know that the Opposition crime; I do not know why it is not mandatory. spokesman will raise that matter at the I refer now to clause 117, which deals with Committee stage—that is, if the legislation is sexual assault. It also mentions a maximum not guillotined. penalty of life imprisonment, but further down Mr Beattie: That is not how it works. At the page it states— the very minimum, they serve half—the very "14 years imprisonment, if— minimum. If you insist on minimum sentences, you take away the discretions of the Bench. (i) immediately before, when or immediately after committing the Mr JOHNSON: Why is there no mention offence, the person— of that in the legislation? (A) does, or threatens to do Convicted criminals are not serving the full bodily harm to anyone; or length of their sentences. That is totally unacceptable to society. We have to be (B) is, or pretends to be, armed harder and firmer in enforcing these penalties. with a dangerous or offensive There is no use passing this legislation if the weapon or instrument; or Government is not going to carry out its intent (C) is in company with anyone; to the utmost. Whether the crime is rape, or"—— murder, armed robbery or petty theft, criminals should have to serve the maximum penalty for and this is the part that gets me— the crime that they have committed. That "(ii) the other person is under 16 issue has to be addressed. years or at least 60 years." Chapter 3 Part 1 of the Code deals with What about the women—in most instances it "Stealing, Dishonest Appropriation and is women who are victims of this despicable Associated Offences". Proposed section crime—between the ages of 16 and 60? Are 151(1) refers to the type of animals that can they not affected just as much as a girl under be stolen, and it covers it fairly well. I take on 16 and a woman over 60? I find that hard to board what the member for Bundaberg said; reckon with, and I hope that the Attorney- the legislation does make it clearer for the General expands on that clause in his reply. I average person to read. I agree with that. think that it needs to be reconsidered. The Proposed section 156(1) states— Code states that if a criminal commits sexual assault on a person under the age of 16 and "A person must not steal anyone's over the age of 60, that person could find property." themselves imprisoned for an extra seven The maximum penalty is 14 years' years. That is totally unacceptable. What imprisonment. If the property stolen or looted about the victims between the ages of 16 and has a value of at least 167 penalty units, then 60? Society deplores this crime. As I said, it is in monetary terms that figure multiplied by, the worst crime against humanity, and it say, 65 comes to $10,855. If livestock to the cannot be condoned by anybody. That value of $10,855 is stolen, that represents a penalty needs to be reconsidered. I know that, substantial sum of money. For example, 2,000 in Government, the Opposition would address sheep valued at $5 a head would be worth that matter, and I hope that this Government $10,000. Those sheep could be worth a lot of Legislative Assembly 12625 15 June 1995 money to somebody if they were kept for a Mr JOHNSON: I do not know anything period. about that, I am sorry. I believe that this clause is totally Mr Purcell: It is taking food out of the inadequate in terms of addressing the penalty. mouths of families. Stock stealing has been a major crime in this Mr JOHNSON: It is a funny thing: of all State for many years; and as the shadow the people I have employed in my life, I Attorney-General said yesterday, it means happened to be speaking to one of them this stealing somebody else's livelihood. If the morning. victim is a wage earner, or if the takings of a shop are stolen, there is no difference in terms Government members interjected. of what has been taken from those people. Mr JOHNSON: I must have touched a The penalties for that crime must be nerve. Are those members fair dinkum, or are addressed in a more open manner so that the they joking? Is the honourable member for general, honest public knows where it stands, Nudgee fair dinkum, or is he joking? I because the perpetrators of crime will not understand that there have been cases in the worry too much about it. However, if people past in which the practice to which members know the severity of the sentence they could opposite refer may have occurred, but I assure face, they might abide by the law. the honourable member for Nudgee—and he As far as I am concerned, legislation is a man from the bush who understands how introduced some time ago by the Minister for people in the bush work—that that is not part Primary Industries made stock stealing in this of our way of life out there. It may happen in State an open cause with the new permit Brisbane; I do not know. system. The problem can be addressed with Only this morning, I spoke to a chap who stock inspectors and grower organisations, was in my employ for six years. He moved such as the CU, the UGA and numerous other away to an inner-country area. He said to me, bodies that represent the grazing and farming "They don't pay as well down here as they do industries. The new permit system makes it in the west." I said, "That's something I am very easy for people to break the law, which is pretty proud of, because the west looks after already pretty easy to break in a State as big their staff and employees." In the bush we as Queensland if a perpetrator is not detected work with one another, and that is why we by either the police or a stock inspector. The have achieved so much; we do not need the crime of stock stealing is on the increase, and union standover tactics of some of the it is an unacceptable crime which we have to Government's mates, such as the members eliminate. Whether it is done through the for Bulimba and Redlands. Minister for Primary Industries or the Mr Budd: What about the shearing Attorney-General, I trust that the Government industry? What about Barry Hammond? What will look at that legislation, because it could be about him? a big help to the police and the law in general. If that section of the Act were changed, it Mr JOHNSON: He was trying to get a would be beneficial to the economy of the fair go for the shearers; there is no doubt whole State and detrimental to those people about that. The member should not try to put who want to break the law. that over me, because I know about the industry. A lot of good people have left the Mr T. B. Sullivan: We want to shearing industry because of the standover eliminate all crime. tactics of the AWU. I know that for a fact. Mr JOHNSON: I am making specific Mr Budd: Rubbish! mention of that one aspect of the law in Mr JOHNSON: The member knows it for relation to theft by stealing stock. This is a very a fact, too. The point is that I have seen serious issue. shearers, and I have seen the unions stand Mr Vaughan: What about employers over them. I have seen Errol Hodder and Bill who steal their employees' wages? Ludwig stand over them. When the shearers Mr JOHNSON: I do not know of that could not produce their union tickets from the ever happening. Would the member like to tell previous year, the unions made them buy two me who does that? in a row. That is the sort of bullyboy tactics used by the AWU. A Government member interjected. The situation has changed a great deal. Mr JOHNSON: Tell me about it. We now have a lot of credible people working Mr Vaughan: It is happening every day within the industry, and the AWU has lost its of the week. buoyancy. The sooner it fades away, the 15 June 1995 12626 Legislative Assembly better, because the shearing industry in the bit of research, they would find that when we west is alive and well. The shearers of the west came to office in 1989 there were 1,200 or are doing a great job. They have been paid more prisoners in gaol for non-payment of properly and they have good conditions. fines. Now there are fewer than 50. There are Mr Budd: Why did Barry Hammond get now more people in gaol serving longer terms taken to court so many times? for the more serious offences. The prison population is increasing day by day, and that Mr JOHNSON: Mr Budd has lost it; he has led to some difficulties which are being does not understand the argument. When the addressed by this Government. Government wants to bring up a subject like that—we can have all the courts in the world, I was interested to hear the member for but the honesty of the people in that part of Indooroopilly talking about sentences and the world will stand true every time, because saying that it is not the maximum gaol they are sincere and honest people; they will sentence that is the problem, but the lack of not cop bullyboy standover tactics, and neither provision for a minimum sentence. The will I. member for Clayfield is concerned that judges cannot impose sentences that fit the crime. I turn now to the backdoor tactics of the We all know that this is an absolute travesty. Attorney-General in relation to the hidden The sentences that are provided for in the agenda of euthanasia in this legislation. Code do fit the crime. Mr WELLS: I rise to a point of order. l will now outline some of the sentences That is untrue and offensive, and I ask that it provided for in the new Criminal Code: murder, be withdrawn. life imprisonment; conspiracy to murder, 14 Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: There is no years; documented threat to murder, 7 years; point of order. The member for Gregory will assault, 7 years; rape, life; the new offence of continue. stalking, 7 years; stealing, 14 years; receiving, Mr JOHNSON: Whether it is called 14 years. The sentence for home invasion has euthanasia, abortion, murder or whatever, it is been increased from 14 years to 20 years, all the same crime, and it will not be condoned and to life imprisonment if somebody is injured by members on this side of the House, even if in that home invasion. I will return to this those on the other side of the House agree subject later in my speech. with it. I would like to correct the member for Mr Beattie: That is untrue. Gregory in regard to two of the assertions that he made. I think that he must have been Mr JOHNSON: That is true. Why does reading a different Criminal Code from the one the Government not come out in the open that I have read. The member for Gregory and tell us what its intentions are with this claims that we do not impose a harsh enough piece of legislation? It contains a lot of hidden sentence on a person who attacks another in agendas; the Attorney-General, members of an indecent assault if the victim is between the the Government and the general public know age of 16 and 60. The Code does say that if it. If Government members wanted to have the victim is a person under 16 or over 60, it is open and proper consultation and be fully a circumstance of aggravation. The crime accountable to the people of Queensland, changes from indecent assault, which attracts they would not have the hype in the media a sentence of 7 years, to aggravated sexual and amongst the general public that they will assault, which attracts a sentence of 14 years. have as a result of this legislation being rushed through at the eleventh hour. This The other matter that the member for Code is not even worth the paper it is written Gregory mentioned was cattle stealing, or on. cattle duffing. He said that the penalties contained in this Criminal Code are not harsh Time expired. enough. In the current Code, there are three Mr HOLLIS (Redcliffe) (2.50 p.m.): It sections dealing with cattle stealing. Under gives me pleasure to join this debate on the section 445, unlawfully using cattle is a simple Criminal Code. In rising to speak to this Code, offence, and the sentence is one year. Under which is relevant to this modern era and to the section 446, suspicion of stealing cattle is also changes that have taken place in the crime a simple offence, attracting a sentence of one scene, I would like to make some comment on year. Under section 448 of the current Code, the current Criminal Code. There have been defacing brands is even included as a simple many complaints from the Opposition that this offence. The new Code deals with the stealing Government has been soft on crime. If of cattle in two respects. We are getting honourable members opposite cared to do a tougher with the penalties. Legislative Assembly 12627 15 June 1995

Mr Briskey: We're beefing them up. and to recognise that truth in sentencing does Mr HOLLIS: That is correct. The offence not work, has never worked and never will of cattle stealing is dealt with in the new Code work. in two respects, that is, stealing and I return to the offence of home invasion. misappropriation of property. Under the new As I said earlier, the sentence for the offence Code, the penalties are 14 years' of home invasion has increased from 14 years imprisonment where the property stolen has a to 20 years. It is probably incumbent on us to value of over $10,000 and seven years define what home invasion is. Honourable otherwise. It is quite a considerable increase in members opposite might have read recently in the sentences. While I am on the subject of the newspapers about the case in the the sentences provided for in the new Criminal Honourable the Attorney-General's electorate Code, I must say that I think we saw a glimmer in which people burst into the door of a house of policy from the Opposition. Perhaps what in Kippa Ring and asked for a black bag. I the member for Indooroopilly and the member think that is what often happens in these for Clayfield are really talking about is a policy cases of home invasion. The perpetrators of of truth in sentencing. They have never the crime know that within those premises actually said that, but it appears that that there are either drugs, money, jewellery or ill- might be the case. gotten gains of some sort, and the press then I would like to draw the attention of beat it up as a home invasion. What has honourable members opposite to what happened in the last few months is that home happened in the State of Victoria in the early invasion has taken on another slant in that 1970s under a Liberal Government. That break and enters are now being referred to by Government brought in truth in sentencing. the media as home invasions. Of course, it is People were being sent to gaol for periods of an invasion if anybody enters someone's 60 years with a minimum of 50; 50 with a premises. There is no doubt about that. minimum of 40; 40 with a minimum of 30, and However, it is the connotation that the media so on. That led to the monstrous situation in is now putting on the word "invasion" that is which people between the ages of 30 and 50 causing a few problems. were going to gaol with never a hope of I want to mention an incident that release. If prisoners are never given the occurred in my electorate involving a opportunity to be released and to return to gentlemen by the name of Castorina who shot society, then apart from the fact that it would and wounded a person who was on his clog up the prison system, the prisoners property at night time. As many members are become unmanageable. aware, Mr Castorina was acquitted of the I think it is a well-known fact not just here charge. In another incident in Rochedale, in Queensland but throughout the world— another young person was shot after he had particularly in New Zealand—that there is an broken into a home. The Redcliffe Herald, our increase in the number of people receiving local paper, spoke to me about this matter. I community-based sentences. In New Zealand made the statement that I agreed with the in 1986, the first full year of operation of police that the matter of people shooting community-based sentences, there were others to defend their homes could get out of 22,412 people serving those sentences. In hand. 1991, there were 42,946 people serving those I believe that we should not get hysterical sentences—an increase of 92 per cent. about home invasions or break and enter Whether or not we believe in rehabilitation— offences. We should adopt an approach to and the Opposition obviously does not—it can what is happening that is more moderate and be seen that in New Zealand the cost of rational. These things happen from time to community service per offender per annum time and there is no doubt that, whatever the was $1,000. The cost of imprisonment per number of police in the community, we could person per annum was approximately never stop people from breaking and entering, $65,697. and we could never stop people committing If we impose sentences which reflect the crime, because crime is a social problem. Over hard-headed desire for truth in sentencing, the past few weeks, it has been good to see then we are eventually going to end up facing that the debate has moved away from a not only enormous financial difficulties but also confrontation-style debate to one of very serious social consequences. I urge the rationalisation of what is happening. Opposition, especially the Opposition Justice Renowned academics are now stating that we spokesman, to look at what is happening in should consider the social issues involved. The other States and in other parts of the world Premier has joined that debate by saying that 15 June 1995 12628 Legislative Assembly we should look to the social causes of crime "Her husband would never come home rather than just reacting when crime occurs. late again . . ." In the early stages of the Castorina I believe that that cartoon is saying what I am debate, when that matter was in the hands of saying: we can be too emotional and not the Police Service and the judicial system, a rational about home invasions and other letter was written to the local paper in crime. If we do not tone down the debate that Redcliffe. That letter stated that I, as the has been continuing in the community, member for Redcliffe, should intervene in the estranged husbands and husbands and wives matter. I wonder whether we are now seeing who come home late will end up as the another glimmer of policy from the Opposition. cartoon portrays. As a Government, we will Yesterday, in this House, we heard the then find ourselves trying to find ways to member for Beaudesert also saying that the correct another social problem: people Government should intervene in the case of a shooting first, and worrying about it afterwards. young man who stole a car and committed several offences. I do not believe that it is ever As to exaggeration and the problems that a matter for Governments to intervene in the causes—just before Christmas, a Liberal legal process. That is a matter for the judiciary, candidate in Redcliffe—— not for Governments. That is why in 1989, Mr FitzGerald: What's her name? when the Government came to office, it made Mr HOLLIS: I forget her name. A Liberal so much of the separation of powers. That candidate put out a dodger in Redcliffe—— doctrine is extremely important. I urge all members of the Opposition to Mr Borbidge: Is that Judy Beresford? listen while I tell them about a very good Mr HOLLIS: It could be. There are two document that was produced in December last Liberal candidates in that electorate. That lady year by the CJC. It is titled Fear of Crime and distributed a dodger which shows a hooded is useful for all members. When dealing with criminal on the front. The caption states "Will the media in my electorate, I often use the yours be one of the eight Redcliffe houses summary of the results of the surveys used to burgled today?" Eight houses burgled per day prepare that document. A paragraph that I multiplied by seven equals 56 per week. often quote states— Naturally, the police were quite concerned "The media, political figures and about those figures. The Chief Inspector of other public commentators can have a Police contacted the local newspaper and said significant impact on the level of public that that dodger is entirely wrong, because the concern about, and fear of, crime. It is figures for Redcliffe show 1.5 houses are vitally important that accurate information broken into per day. Over a week, that is a big about the extent and nature of crime is difference—— widely disseminated and that issues Mr Beanland: Too much. relating to crime are reported responsibly by the media." Mr HOLLIS: I agree with Mr Beanland. That is too many. One burglary is too many I believe that that is a point that we should all but, as I have already said, we will not stop take on board. them. However, when people exaggerate such Over the weeks that the two shootings as this candidate did, anxiety is created in the that I mentioned previously were headlines in community. The Opposition has no policies, so the news, a very good cartoon appeared in it is out to scare the pensioners. It is out to the Courier-Mail. I compliment Leahy on what scare the most vulnerable people in our he says through that cartoon. The cartoon community. shows a lady lying in bed. It says— I was interested to note that when the "Awakened by a noise in the front member for Surfers Paradise, the member for room . . . Caloundra and the candidate whom I She knew the intruder was inside her mentioned earlier came together in Redcliffe house . . . for a crime forum, only 40 people attended. The media was on their side and said that 60 Alone except for a rifle"— people attended. The difference between that which is shown hanging above her bed— crime forum and the meeting held by the "Trembling she pulled the trigger . . . honourable member for Kurwongbah is that the meeting held by the honourable member The government AND the opposition for Kurwongbah was to inform people. The praised her quick reflexes"— members opposite held a meeting to incite and the cartoon shows a press release— people. Legislative Assembly 12629 15 June 1995

Mr Borbidge: What's this? It wasn't a Mr BORBIDGE: It has served criminal forum. Queensland for nigh on a century, but it Mr HOLLIS: I was outside. I heard needed some sensible modernisation. That them. I counted the numbers. I know what is was three years ago. For the benefit of the going on. As responsible members of honourable member who interjects, I point out Parliament, it is the duty of members of the that that was over one thousand dawns and Opposition to tell the truth. I know that dusks ago. Today, what we have is effectively sometimes it is very difficult, but it is their duty draft No. 4. We had the 1992 draft, we had to tell the truth to the pensioners, the the December 1994 draft, we had the April disadvantaged and the media. The more 1995 draft and now we have, allegedly, the rational debate we have on the subject of final version—the fourth draft—before us crime and the more sense that is brought into today. that debate, the more the Criminal Code will What we have is a politicised mess. be able to do what it is meant to do, which is Contained in the legislation we see proposals to assist all Governments—because this for an end to jury trials in circumstances where Criminal Code will be around for a long citizens should have a right to jury trials. time—the police and the judiciary. I support Opposition members happen to believe that the Bill. juries are a foundation stone of our system of Mr BORBIDGE (Surfers Paradise— justice. We will not deny Queenslanders the Leader of the Opposition) (3.09 p.m.): This Bill right to a jury trial just because the epitomises the confused and erratic policy Government of the day does not want to making of this Government across-the-board, provide enough judges to handle the case but particularly in the law and order arena. We load. Government members would expect a have experienced the mismanagement of jury trial—presumably up until today—and we health, of services to rural and regional should not deny anyone in this State a jury Queensland, of the HOME Scheme and the trial just because the Government of the day lack of performance right across Government. does not want to provide enough judges or This Bill epitomises the totally dysfunctional because the Crown has decided that its approach to tackling the law and order crisis of chances of gaining convictions is better served Labor. A massive gap exists between the PR by the summary process because it does not perception and reality. This legislation trust juries to give it a good enough batting represents a bellwether of this administration's average. That is what the Government is abilities as opposed to its public relations. enshrining in law in this Bill. Those clauses of They are like chalk and cheese. this Code are an absolute travesty, which have absolutely no place in the Criminal Code of the I ask honourable members to consider State of Queensland. the litany of disaster and indecision in relation to this Bill. It's a classic! We first saw this Bill, in We also see in this latest draft the novel draft format, in June 1992, after the first report suggestion—no doubt dreamt up in the middle of the committee that was drawn together to of the night by the Attorney-General—that a examine the issues provided the Government crime committed by moonlight is somehow with preliminary advice in 1990. more heinous than a crime committed by sunlight. That herbivorous harlequin is making Mr FitzGerald interjected. the moonlight safe. He is enshrining in law a Mr BORBIDGE: As my friend the difference between crime committed during member for Lockyer reminds me, here it is the day and crime committed at night. here. That was in 1990. At that stage, it was Notwithstanding the Minister's explanation generally a sensible document. It did not to the Parliament yesterday, we all see in the meddle too much with the principles of justice legislation a regime that potentially allows established over literally hundreds of years in euthanasia by stealth. I say to the the courts of England, and then of Attorney-General, what is not needed is an Queensland. interpretation by my lord the Attorney-General. The first draft contained simpler language In relation to this confused mess, what is and some refinement. Generally, that broad needed is what my colleague the member for draft contained the sorts of things one would Indooroopilly suggested yesterday, and that is expect to see in a review of a document that for the Government to again take this Code has served this State well and served justice in away and bring it back in a state fit to be this State well. debated. Mr T. B. Sullivan: You wouldn't tackle Apart from all the other problems, the the deficiencies. Government should engage in a debate on 15 June 1995 12630 Legislative Assembly those issues which, extraordinarily, were has disowned the allegedly finished, polished, excluded specifically from the terms of finessed end product. I do not blame him, but reference of the original committee Mr O'Regan's response begs the very relevant established to review the Code by—and we question: just who did advise the Government can only presume, such is the mystery of the on this Code when it began on a course of processes that go on within the Attorney- fiddling so comprehensively and so curiously General's mind—all the other groups and with the original draft? There is barely a lawyer individuals who had their pennies' worth. I refer in the State who has not bagged the end to the perceived hot potatoes that the result. Who is going to own up to this Government, for party political reasons, to mastermind? protect sensitivities and to prevent the The Attorney-General has told us that he potential for division within the caucus, has has consulted widely. He certainly had the simply left out of consideration. The time, but just whom has he consulted? He has Government has walked away from them. spoken of the unrivalled abilities of the Those topics include abortion, prostitution and draftspeople. He has spoken about the even betting houses. The review committee revision being under the carriage of a body of was not allowed to look at the Criminal Code in selected experts. Who were they? I wonder if relation to betting houses! I can understand the Attorney-General has any intention that the committee was not allowed to whatsoever to be open and accountable. We consider topics such as abortion because a all know the identity of the man who wrote the vocal group within the caucus and party policy Code that we are here to revise. Let us see if calls for the liberalising of the abortion laws. the Minister is prepared to tell us who his The same applies to the prostitution laws. panel of selective experts were, or was it all his However, why would the Government not let own work? In a way, of course, it is. The the committee consider the law in relation to Attorney-General deserves all the credit. With betting houses? the entire law and order arena, just as much Those factors all beg the simple question: as any other endeavour, this Government is why? Why are we debating this mess? There now hoist well and truly on its own petard. can be only one answer, and that is panic. Under this Government, the Premier's Labor knows that its record on law and order is office guiding principles are not about making one of the key reasons it faces defeat at the sound decisions and following them through. election, which will be held when the Premier Instead it is preoccupied with making sure that overcomes the fright he received from the the lighting is right under the palm trees. It is tracking research that he received on the all one and the same thing. This weekend, and calls an election soon before preoccupation of the medium being the full things get even worse. He knows that, like he extent of the message has become the did in 1989, it is time for him to pretend that foundation of this Government's overall he is tough on crime. He needs to create incompetence and its inability to cope with the another mirage desperately. I suspect that issues of real substance requiring real work those reasons largely explain this mess. and real consultation, such as rewriting the In 1992, the Government started off with Criminal Code. It is this core incompetence, a pretty worthwhile Code. It has changed it this preoccupation with the ephemeral, that constantly, if slowly and doubtfully, to keep sees the legislation in the sorry state in which it pace with its own sense of panic that unless it is in today. That is despite the fact that the first delivered what at least appeared to be a draft of the Code was before us literally three tough Code it was only getting deeper into years ago. The same is true across the electoral trouble. From that panic has spectrum of law and order issues confronting emerged the mess that we see today. The this Government. That means that this censoring of what was and was not to be legislation is, by definition, introduced into this reviewed simply enhances and underlines the place with scarce planning and scarce obvious conclusion: this is all about forethought. perceptions. No wonder the Government is For example, the heavier maximum confused, the product is confused and the penalties contained in this Bill mean nothing Attorney-General is confused. Just where did without an amendment to the Penalties and all of this come from? That is another part of Sentences Act to clarify the constraint placed the confusion and the mystery. The people on judges whereby sending someone to who were involved originally were cut loose prison is regarded as being a sentence of last and have cut loose. No less a legal light than resort. The Government's actions on this point Rob O'Regan, QC, who was a member of the have been nothing less than mind boggling. original committee and who, in fact, chaired it, For 18 months while this constraint was under Legislative Assembly 12631 15 June 1995 constant attack from the Opposition, it was barefaced that they try to turn obvious, clear, defended constantly by both the Premier and stark mismanagement into a positive. They try the Attorney-General in this place and outside. to suggest that the high prison population, at The Attorney-General kept telling us that it was least in relation to available resources, is a principle that had always been in place long something which reflects that the Government before it was codified, that the Government is tough on crime, that overcrowding in the had no intention of changing it. But now that gaols is all put down to the fact that "Marshall" has changed and, again, we have to ask: Goss is really the toughest, biggest, damned why? If the Attorney-General says that we are "lock 'em up and throw away the key" lawman dealing with an undying principle, why change in the west. That is rubbish. Honourable it? How does he explain a backflip in which his members have only to read the review of the feet apparently never left the ground? Queensland Corrective Services Commission The Attorney-General still defends the of April 1993 to have this particular fallacy put requirements in the current Act and has into context and to see that, as with the defended it since he announced that it was to Criminal Code, we are once again really—and be changed. Yet he is changing it. He is sadly—dealing with confusion, incompetence changing it because he knows the perception and naked, brain-numbing panic from the is that this Government is soft on crime and, members opposite. therefore, the principle he holds so dear and The clear claim of this Government in has continued to defend goes out the window. relation to the current prison overcrowding is He should follow it out the window. Judging by that prisoner numbers were allegedly trending his performance in relation to this legislation, I down early in its term of office, something doubt whether he could decide which window which enabled it to quite deliberately cancel to jump through. We are witnessing more plans for new prisons and close down existing politics of the very worst sort from the facilities. The second string to that bow is that, Attorney-General, the Premier and having undertaken this course, the "lock 'em Cabinet—the politics of political panic. And the up and throw away the key" approach of this member for Redcliffe said that crime is not tough-on-crime Government caught it really a problem and that we have overstated suddenly by surprise. The Government said it! that it was so tough. This document shows The politics of panic demonstrated in this that claim to be absolute and unadulterated legislation were brought about by crime rubbish. It shows that, for at least three years, statistics from the Queensland Police Service the Government had no plan for prison which showed that crime against the person infrastructure. It was simply continuing to do was up 43.9 per cent between 1990-91 and what it does best—flying absolutely blind. It 1993-94; serious assaults, up 45.1 per cent; shows that this Government did not know what rapes and attempted rapes, up 27.6 per cent; was happening with prisoner numbers—it did armed robbery, up 40.3 per cent; and break not have the vaguest idea. It shows that, and enters on dwellings, up 44.2 per cent. We when it closed down Woodford in 1991, there are witnessing the politics—the Criminal was strong opposition from the Corrective Code—of panic. The panic because of the Services Commission. It shows that prisoner failure of planning and management shows numbers began to trend steadily upwards, not through everywhere. as the Government would have us believe in 1993, but in 1991, almost immediately For example, the PSMC's review of the following the closure of Woodford. So then, Queensland Corrective Services Commission allegedly in the wake of the report, we published in April 1993 stated that a embarked on a crash program to remedy the fundamental responsibility of the Government situation and to ensure that there were in relation to the operation of the Criminal enough cells to handle the flood brought Code is to ensure that the corrections system about by the tough-on-crime Government led has the capacity to implement the orders of by "Marshall" Goss. That has not happened. the courts. The plain fact is that, after years of mismanagement of the prison resources of Barely half the money set aside for law this State, there is simply no room whatsoever and order in last year's Budget was spent. for more prisoners in the system. After five Once again, we see a massive difference years of the mismanagement under this between reality and perception. The farce Government, our gaols are at well in excess of goes on and on. We are told by the Police 100 per cent capacity. The Government, which Minister that we have a 90 per cent loves to deal in the distortion of perceptions, operational Queensland Police Service. He has tried to turn this situation, peculiarly, into a says this is in order to uphold his claim under political positive. Members opposite are so this Government that there are 1,500 15 June 1995 12632 Legislative Assembly operational police. The CJC does not believe performance it was. In my contribution, I will him. It said that operational police were more take the opportunity to remind the Leader of like 73 per cent of the total. On and on it goes. the Opposition not of his rhetoric but of the In its review of the Queensland Police Service, substance of the National Party in office. the PSMC said that the ratio of operational to The Leader of the Opposition spoke on a non-operational police was in decline and had range of issues concerning the enforcement of been for several years. Again, what we have is the law. Honourable members will recall that a very deliberate failure on the part of this the Leader of the Opposition was whingeing Government. The CJC and the PSMC indicate about the reduction of jury trials in the District quite unequivocally that the process simply Court. In 1985, I recall that the National Party has not occurred at anywhere near the rate was so committed to civil libertarian principles claimed by this Government. In fact, they that it introduced three pieces of legislation— indicate that it has barely gotten off the the Electricity (Continuity of Supply) Act 1985, ground, so the Minister's claims are the Electricity Authorities (Industrial Causes) demonstrably false. Act 1985, and the Industrial (Commercial Queenslanders are now looking at a Practices) Act. What did members opposite comprehensive, across-the-board mess with do? The honourable members for Waterford regard to the proposed new Code. Allegedly, and Gladstone would remember this. In one of we are getting a Code which is going to be those pieces of legislation, they reversed the tough on crime. We may also be getting onus of proof; people were guilty until proven euthanasia and an end to jury trials for people innocent. who should get them. Pretty logically, as long Mr T. B. Sullivan: Totally against our as the Government does go on to address the system. shortcomings in the Penalties and Sentences Act, we will see more criminals going to gaol. Mr BEATTIE: It was totally against not That is what the Government wants to achieve only our system but also the dignity of the with this Bill. It wants to look tough, but there is common law that we inherited from Great a very simple problem, that is, because of the Britain. That is how little respect members incompetence and lack of planning under this opposite had for the principles of Government, there is simply nowhere to put law—absolutely none. They reversed the onus prisoners. The gaols are full. Through exactly of proof. Members opposite should not whinge the same lack of planning and commitment to about the reduction in jury trials; they are on the day-to-day practicalities of reasonable shaky ground. As to the Opposition's "support" public administration, the watch-houses are of jury trials—did Luke Shaw agree with also chock-a-block. honourable members opposite? Did he indicate his support for their position? This Bill simply continues the litany of Members opposite are in a very weak position. constant incompetence from this Government across-the-board in the law and order arena. It Mr T. B. Sullivan: He's going; he's has taken an incredibly long time to get here. leaving. It is an absolute and a total mess. Everyone Mr BEATTIE: Of course the Leader of from the prosecutors to the civil libertarians the Opposition is leaving. He knows when he have bagged it. In its various parts, it is illogical is beaten and down and out. And why would and/or unjust. It cannot be upheld by the he not wimp out when he is down? The current supporting law and order infrastructure, Leader of the Opposition can concede now. particularly with respect to prisons and An honourable member: It's watch-houses, that is if it ever has the chance devastating. to increase the flow of criminals into the correctional system. Quite simply, this Mr BEATTIE: Yes, it is devastating. legislation should not be here. We would be The Leader of the Opposition raised the better off sticking with the 1989 model until the issue of judges. He claimed that we are not coalition is in a position to offer the people of prepared to appoint enough judges. In the 18 Queensland a sensible and just document months that I returned to the practice of law with the appropriate backing and planning. before being elected to this House, there was Time expired. an appalling shortage of judges. This Attorney has set about redressing that position. In Mr BEATTIE (Brisbane Central) those days, when a civil case was ready for (3.28 p.m.): We have probably just heard the trial, litigants still had to wait for two years after last major speech in this House by Mr the pleadings were finished before they got a Borbidge as Leader of the National Party. I hearing before a judge. What a supreme have to say: what a disappointing display of hypocrisy for members opposite to Legislative Assembly 12633 15 June 1995 talk about a shortage of judges! There were I turn to the other issues that Mr Borbidge insufficient judges on the bench, and the ones raised. He claimed that the Attorney is guilty of who were there were overworked. That was some sort of indecision, yet the member for the position in 1988-89. Any practising lawyer Caloundra claimed that there had not been who is honest enough to tell the truth will say enough consultation. Come on, guys! that there was an appalling shortage of judges Members opposite cannot have it both ways. and that this Attorney has done something There has been consultation on this piece of about it. In addition, the Attorney has legislation for five and a half years. There may appointed a range of judges who more have been five drafts, but that is what accurately reflect the community, such as consultation is all about—so that people are women and solicitors. I believe that the involved in the process. Members opposite Attorney is to be commended for taking those cannot have it both ways. They cannot claim steps. on the one hand that there has been no consultation and then on the other hand try to The Leader of the Opposition continually claim that the process has taken too long. misleads the House and the community about the law. He claimed that the Penalties and Mr T. B. Sullivan: They say the gaols Sentences Act states that prison is to be used are full but the courts aren't being tough only as a last resort for young first offenders. enough. Do members know when that legislation was Mr BEATTIE: As I said, members enacted? When the National Party was in opposite cannot have it both ways. There is office. If it is such a bad law, why when they always a degree of sensitivity about these were in Government did Mr Borbidge and his issues. Yesterday in the House, I reminded colleagues not change it? The Attorney has members of the Opposition of their record said that because the National Party has when they were in Government. This morning, misrepresented to the community the the member for Nicklin took exception to my provisions of the Penalties and Sentences Act, comments and demanded that I apologise. then he will change it so that prison will not be What a lot of nonsense! I never claimed that the last resort. The Cabinet submission to that he was corrupt, but I made the point that no- effect has now been approved, and there will one objected to what was going on. The be amendments to that Act which totally member for Nicklin grossly overreacted. I have remove the ambiguity about prisons being a never seen such a wuss! Talk about a last resort in sentencing. The comments by sensitive little petal who cannot cop any the Leader of the Opposition during this degree of criticism! I had much worse thrown debate were untrue. In any event, that at me during the debate, but I did not put on a principle was applied when he and his performance like "Mickey in shorts". colleagues were in Government. Before this year's State election, those In Kelleher's case of 1994, the Court of who served with Sir Joh and Sir Joh himself Appeal, consisting of Chief Justice Macrossan should apologise to the people of Queensland and Appeal Justices Pincus and Davies, said for the need for the Fitzgerald inquiry. The of the last resort provision of the Act— Fitzgerald inquiry cost Queenslanders millions of dollars, but was necessary to expose the "Imprisonment is to be a 'last resort' deep-seated corruption which developed in the sense that it is to be imposed as a under the Bjelke-Petersen Government, punishment only when nothing less will leading to corruption in the upper echelons of meet the case. Generally speaking the the Police Department and corruption among provision merely reflects the practice politicians as well. I have been saying this which the Courts followed before the publicly for some time. As the honourable Penalties and Sentences Act of 1992 was member for Gympie is aware, I said it in enacted." Gympie recently. I table a copy of the report in Of course, that was the Act that we the Gympie Times of 6 June, which had me introduced. In reality, that legislation merely calling on the National Party to apologise for reflected the practice that has been followed the corruption under Sir Joh and to apologise since Adam and Eve were in shorts. for what happened as a result of the corruption. I call on the member for Nicklin and Mr T. B. Sullivan: So nothing all of his mates to apologise to the people of changed. Queensland. When he has done that, I might Mr BEATTIE: Nothing changed. Our be happy to talk to him further. 1992 Act did not change the law that existed The people of Queensland need to be before. aware that law and order will become a Dutch 15 June 1995 12634 Legislative Assembly auction if members opposite get their way in Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The this election campaign. They are not honourable member finds the remarks by the interested in law and order; they are not member for Brisbane Central offensive. interested in crime. They are interested only in Mr BEATTIE: The remark that he winning votes, and they will use law and order cannot read? I will withdraw it unreservedly. It as best they can to do that. I understand that is obvious that by using large cue cards he members opposite have been approaching can get the As and the Ts. victims and trying to persuade them to participate in television ads, radio ads and Mr LITTLEPROUD: Mr Deputy newspaper ads. That is what they want. I warn Speaker—— Queenslanders to be very wary of the fact that Mr BEATTIE: I will withdraw; he cannot the National Party wants to turn law and order do the As and the Ts. into a circus. Mr LITTLEPROUD: I rise to a point of Opposition members interjected. order. That was another insulting remark that I Mr BEATTIE: Listen to them bay! They find offensive, and I ask that it be withdrawn. do not like their tactics being exposed before Mr BEATTIE: I withdraw. I have better the television ads go to air. things to do. I know that this is an attempt by If one needs any more proof of the the member to take up my time. He has taken intentions of the Opposition, one should up a minute and a half of my time already, but consider the comments by the Police Minister I still have 10 minutes to go. this morning. He tabled a Russell Cooper news I want to make sure that the people of release, on the back of which Russell Cooper Queensland are aware of exactly what the wrote— Liberals and Nationals were like in power and "Issues. Beat up law and order. Beat how they misused law and order issues. It up health, education. Beat up should not be forgotten that the Liberals were Government services." there with the National Party when the There is the proof that the National Party Government declared a state of emergency to wants to beat up law and order for short-term protect the Springboks Rugby team against political gain. I will table that press release anti-apartheid demonstrators. I remember that again so that people can read about the fact only too well, because I was there and got that members opposite want to beat up law bashed in the process. What do members and order to win votes. It is obvious that they opposite say today when Nelson Mandela is do not care. Their opposition to the new the President of a non-racist South Africa? Criminal Code is all about short-term political They supported the old regime. We at least stunts; it is not about any genuine concern. had the decency to support democracy and Let us not forget what members opposite were take an anti-racist position. like when they were in office. The Liberals were there with Joh and the Mr LITTLEPROUD: I rise to a point of Nationals during the time of the evil anti- order. We have seen a stirring performance by protest laws. They were with Joh when he the member for Brisbane Central, but I do not called the Catholic and Church of England believe that he is entitled to table a document archbishops communists for daring to question that has already been tabled. the morality of such suppression of public expression. The Liberals were there with the Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Nationals when Joh called a former Miss Palaszczuk): Order! The document has been Australia a crow when she also asked a tabled this morning already, so there is no question about that law. They were there with need to table the same document. If the the Nationals when the police used that honourable member wishes, he can pass the obnoxious law to arrest a group of concerned document across to whomever he likes after Christians singing hymns and staging a he has concluded his speech. peaceful protest in Queen's Park on a quiet Mr BEATTIE: Thank you, Mr Deputy Sunday afternoon. The Liberals were there Speaker. I am happy to accept that ruling. with the Nationals when the police again used Later, I will take the document and read it to that law to arrest a man walking in protest with the member slowly, because I know that he his dog down an empty street in Bargara near cannot read. Bundaberg at 2 o'clock in the morning. He was Mr LITTLEPROUD: I rise to a point of a real threat to the community, that boy! order. I find those comments offensive, and I Mr Ardill: And they were trying to pull ask that they be withdrawn. people off the footpaths. Legislative Assembly 12635 15 June 1995

Mr BEATTIE: The member is right; they up to scratch; and she basically insulted any were. They were in the political bed with the Government member who made a Nationals when the Government shut down a contribution to this debate. I do not know Federal program treating Aborigines in Cape whether or not that is the way to win York for glaucoma because there were votes—maybe it is; maybe I have missed my rumours that members of the medical team cue—but Mrs Sheldon totally misunderstood were encouraging their patients to get on the the law and showed no respect whatsoever. electoral roll. Apparently, National/Liberal Party For the benefit of Mrs Sheldon, I point out that politics came before Aboriginal eye treatment. section 443 of the current Code provides that That is how low those members opposite a magistrate can impose two years' sunk. imprisonment only on summary convictions for The police Special Branch—this is the law offences in the Code. The new Code also that members opposite support—was the provides for two years' imprisonment for National Party's Gestapo. It compiled secret offences dealt with by a magistrate. Nothing dossiers on law-abiding Queenslanders who has changed. What is wrong with the poor disagreed with the National Party. Let us not woman? forget that files were held on people such as The Sir Samuel Griffith Code, which is the former Vice-Chancellor of the University of over 100 years old, needs to be reformed and Queensland, Sir Zelman Cowen, who later changed. The Attorney-General, through this became the Governor-General. Those were long process—and it has been a long process the sorts of persons on whom members by necessity—has brought about sensible opposite kept files. That is what they mean by changes. I want to deal with some of those law and order. They should not go on with provisions. I refer particularly to the issue of their nonsense. jury trials. Division 3 deals with committal I refer now to the Government's record. proceedings and other summary proceedings Under the Goss Government, the raw before the Magistrates Court. Section 320 has numbers of sworn police have been bolstered been the subject of some debate here and at almost twice the rate of population growth. has received some criticism from the Law The number of police on Queensland streets Society, of which I have been a proud has increased at over three times the rate of member since 1978 and am still a member. population growth. By 30 June 1995, there will The provisions of the current Code, that is the be over 5,600 police, or about 90 per cent of old Code—and this is what has been the total numbers assigned to operational misunderstood—are cumbersome and duties. This compares with 4,120, or 78 per complex. cent, of the total number of police in There are three elements to the trial by operational work under the National Party jury issue. One is election by the defendant to Government. That represents over 1,500 more go to a jury trial. That is what happens in the operational police in five years—a figure which majority of cases. The second relates to will increase to 2,000 over the next three simple offences which are dealt with only years. The current funded strength of the summarily; they do not go to a District Court Queensland Police Service is 6,340, which trial. The third is that a magistrate can deal means that Queensland now has the highest with certain offences, such as dangerous number of policemen in the history of the driving. The problem is that, under the Drugs Police Service. This Government has improved Misuse Act, it is up to the prosecutor, not the technology so that police can more effectively defendant, to elect to go to a District Court trial detect and respond to crime. I have with me in before a jury; or to determine if the case will be the Chamber a graph which shows dealt with summarily. There are presently Government expenditure on policing. It shows about 23,000 drug arrests a year, quite a lot of the police expenditure figures for 1989-91 and which are minor. If it was left up to each comparative figures each year up to 1995-96. defendant to elect to go to a jury trial, that Opposition members should look at that; it would bog down the District Court. The says it all. I table that graph for the information decision as to whether cases will go to the of the House. District Court will now be made by a magistrate I refer now to the nonsense that members in the Magistrates Court. As a lawyer and as to heard from Mrs Sheldon. The Leader of the whether a trial under the Drugs Misuse Act Liberal Party came in here and did a real goes to a District Court jury—I am a lot happier doozey. She insulted magistrates, saying that to have the decision determined by a they were not up to the new Code; she magistrate rather than by a prosecutor. That is insulted the Magistrates Court; she attacked clearly much better. I would like to hear the legal profession, saying that they were not members of the Opposition say that they 15 June 1995 12636 Legislative Assembly support prosecutors determining whether a In terms of defendants—under this Code, defendant should go to trial before a jury in a in trials before a magistrate, all police briefs will District Court rather than a magistrate. They go to the defence counsel, so the full would not say that, because not one evidence will go to the defence at the trial, defendant in any one of those 23,000 cases similar to what happens in the District Court. In would prefer to have his or her case addition, we have appointed better qualified determined by a prosecutor. That power has magistrates. been taken out of the hands of the police and Time expired. given to the people to whom it ought be given, that is, magistrates. Mr GILMORE (Tablelands) (3.49 p.m.): What a performance members have seen this I want to talk about the truth. One of the afternoon from the member for Brisbane things that Mr Borbidge and Mrs Sheldon Central! never do is talk about the truth. The truth of Government members interjected. the matter is that Queensland is not doing anything terribly revolutionary in terms of Mr GILMORE: Yes, Government denying these matters going to a jury trial. In members should applaud him, because he New South Wales, there is a bar on property was demonstrating all the symptoms of a offences going to a jury trial if the property is Government in desperate and awful trouble. valued at $10,000 or less. Just before the All we have heard from Government members State election in New South Wales, there was in this debate—— a move to increase that sum to $15,000. That An Opposition member: Back to the was what Fahey was going to do; I am not Boer War. quite sure what happened to that legislation. Mr GILMORE: I will get to that. All we However, forgetting what was intended by have heard from Government members, Fahey—at the moment in New South Wales, if including the member from Brisbane Central, a case involves a property offence involving is 20 minutes of tipping a bucket on what $10,000 or less, that matter does not go to a happened in the Boer War and the siege at jury trial. In the Northern Territory, the limit is Khartoum. We have gone right back—— $5,000; in the Commonwealth, it is $500; in Great Britain it is 100 pounds sterling. There An Opposition member: The Boxer are precedents for this not only in Britain—in revolt. the mother jurisdiction, as members opposite Mr GILMORE: They even spoke about would like to call it—but right next door in New the Boxer rebellion, of course, because they South Wales. There are bars on the amounts have nothing to say about the programs of involved in property offences going to jury trial. this Government. That is what the provisions provide. Mr BEATTIE: I rise to a point of order. I The magistrate's discretion set out in have been misrepresented and seek a section 320 is subject to the considerations set withdrawal. I did not raise the siege of out on page 184 of the Criminal Code. One of Khartoum. I talked about Cathay, but not the the issues that is relevant in a magistrate siege of Khartoum. determining whether a matter should go to a Mr HOLLIS: I rise to a point of order, Mr District Court trial before a jury is whether or Deputy Speaker. not the charged person wants the case to be Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr decided summarily. That is relevant to the Palaszczuk): Order! The Chair can only take discretion exercised by the magistrate. A one point of order at a time. The Chair will rule whole range of other issues that need to be on this point of order. There is no point of taken into account are set out. I think that is a order. What is the member for Redcliffe's point sensible application of the law. I understand of order? the concerns that some people have about this, but it is crazy to have—as was the case Mr HOLLIS: My point of order is that I recently—a three-day trial in the District Court never mentioned the previous Government at for the theft of a rose bush; a two-day trial for any time during my speech. wilful damage to a paper cup; and a trial Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! There alleging the possession of a cockroach zapper is no point of order. suspected of being stolen. If someone can Mr GILMORE: I must say that they are seriously suggest to me that that should cost a nervous bunch of nellies on the other side of the taxpayers of Queensland a three-day or the House today; they are leaping to their feet two-day trial, then he or she is better than I because they are so nervous. A bunch of am. That is a waste of taxpayers' money. them will not be coming back after the Legislative Assembly 12637 15 June 1995 election. Tomorrow will be their last day, so State which will throw the State into confusion, they had better enjoy it here today. although not in a big way. Certainly it will not Mr Comben interjected. confuse the honourable member sitting on the front bench at the present time, because he Mr GILMORE: We will miss the member understands the law. However, there are many for Kedron; but he is leaving voluntarily. There people in our community who are are a few grinning members of the back bench disadvantaged either by race or by their who will not be here after the election. Why mental incapacity in their ability to understand have we not heard the good news from the the structure of the law. Those people are Government? Why have we not heard how going to be seriously disadvantaged by this proud Government members are of what the legislation if it is passed. Government is doing? Why have they spent their time tipping a bucket on the past history Why is it that so many disadvantaged of this State? people inhabit our gaols? Why is that so? It is not necessarily because disadvantaged Mr Beattie: I thought we did that quite people are thieves and liars and cheats; it may well. well be that disadvantaged people are being Mr GILMORE: That is interesting, and I poorly served by the legal system. suppose I will leave that hang there. We are Mr Budd: The term "why is it so" was here today for nothing more nor less than an used by Julius Sumner Miller. He was dead 50 exercise in self-aggrandisement. The years ago, you donkey. Attorney-General has brought this legislation into the House not because he wants to Mr GILMORE: Could we have that amend the law for any particularly good recorded! I am quite sure that the constituents reason, but because he wants to take his of the member's electorate would like to read place in history beside Sir Samuel Griffith. The that in the Hansard. Attorney-General wants to go down in history Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Chair asks alongside one of the finest ever the honourable member for Redlands to Queenslanders. I am afraid that the exercise withdraw the term "donkey". has failed. Can one imagine the miserable pleadings of the Attorney-General to the Mr Budd: I withdraw the term "donkey". Premier and the Leader of House? Can one Mr GILMORE: I have serious concerns imagine him saying, "Please let me bring my that disadvantaged people in our community legislation into the House in the dying days of are very poorly treated by the criminal law and this Government, because we might not be the changes we are facing today will make no here next month and I have to take my place difference. Some time ago, I spent three days in history with Sam." in Cape York Peninsula observing what Mr Littleproud: As a philosopher. happens in the Magistrates Court. Twenty to thirty disadvantaged people come before that Mr GILMORE: As a philosopher and as court during the day. I would like to speak for a great Queenslander. The Sam and Dean just a few moments about the process that I Show; how it rolls off the tongue! How proud observed, which is not a process of which Queenslanders must be today when they Queenslanders ought to be proud. have legislation coming into this House that have been universally rejected by people with In the morning before the court a knowledge of the law who have studied it. commences a group of people, all to be They say, "Take it away. We do not want to prosecuted on that day, sit along the rail of the know about this piece of law. We do not want courthouse like crows on a fence waiting to be it rushed through the Parliament at the shot. In the case of Cape York Peninsula, the present time in its current form, because it is a duty solicitor, who works for the local legal failure in many aspects of the criminal law." service, has never seen those people before. We have to rush it through because the man He does not know whether they are being over there wants to be famous. charged with a major or a minor crime. All he knows is that they are going before the One of the great benefits of living in magistrate. Queensland is certainty about the law. People who come to this country very quickly learn Mr Hollis: If it was a major crime they and get to understand our law. They feel would be in the cells, not sitting on the rail. comfortable with it, they know what they can Mr GILMORE: They may well be bailed do and where they can go. They know the and they may be going to be referred to edges of the law. Today we are seeing a another court, but they are coming before the fundamental change in the criminal law in this magistrate. 15 June 1995 12638 Legislative Assembly

Mr FitzGerald: They may have got bail. people who may well have walked away free Mr GILMORE: They may have been people if they had had the financial bailed, but nonetheless they are sitting there wherewithal to employ a decent solicitor who waiting. The duty solicitor knows nothing of could discuss matters with them prior to their these people and they know nothing of him. going to court and who could put up a decent They do not know whether they can trust their case in their defence. This Government very lives to him. He took a clipboard and I supports having wretched people thrown into walked with him to see what happened. He gaols because they have not got what it takes walked to the first person, asked his name and to defend themselves. wrote it down. He asked what the person was I wonder why this is all happening. Clearly, being charged with and wrote that down. He as has been mentioned previously by the asked whether the person was guilty, and member for Indooroopilly, there is a shortage wrote down the reply, "Yes, boss." Then he of magistrates, judges and enterprise in this went on to the next person and the next Government to make sure that the criminal law person and so on down the line. After he had operates effectively and properly, and for the done that, we went into the court, and the benefit of the community at large, which successful prosecution of those people includes the poor people who come before the became a matter of course. There was no law. genuine defence provided for those people. Mr Hollis: But the member for Why do members think that 60 per cent of Indooroopilly wants truth in sentencing. He Aboriginal people are in our gaols today? It wants to goal them all. has much to do with the court system, the criminal law and the way it is dealt with in our Mr GILMORE: That is not the problem. courts. Does the Government think this Code I am talking about the administration of the is going to help? law before these people are thrown in gaol. Honourable members opposite want to gaol Mr Hollis: You should be addressing the them when they are innocent. quality of lawyers. Surely if he was any good, he would have got them off. Surely you should Mr Hollis: He wants truth in sentencing. be addressing the quality of the lawyers. Mr GILMORE: He wants to put them in Mr GILMORE: I am talking about the gaol when they are guilty. We will probably get disadvantaged people of the Cape York half the people out of the gaols, for goodness' Peninsula as I observed them being sake. The member for Brisbane Central spoke prosecuted in our courts. It is absolutely at some length about juries, and he spoke in a unacceptable that this kind of system survives very learned way which is very interesting. One today, and happens not just in Cape York. of our birthrights in this country, and one of the Anyone who walks past any courthouse on a things I spoke about earlier in terms of Monday morning, particularly in rural certainty of the law, is that we ought to have a Queensland, will see the poor wretched choice in respect of whether we are judged by creatures sitting on the rail waiting to get shot our peers or otherwise. That right should of, and the duty solicitor, who have they have reside with the accused. Clearly there are never seen before—— pieces of legislation under which that does not happen, and that is a dreadful pity. Mrs Edmond interjected. Mr T. B. Sullivan: Even for a very Mr GILMORE: The honourable member minor offence? would be a great one to talk! She is the one who is supporting what is happening out there. Mr GILMORE: I say to the honourable: The Government is locking up 60 per cent of there is nothing that could be a minor offence the Aboriginal population, and the honourable about you; you are a walking violation, a member is happy with that. She is defending dreadful piece of work. The member for the Government's position. I cannot believe Brisbane Central was speaking about a trial that she would be such a—in deference to the over malicious damage to a cup. He said it Parliament I will not say it. went on for two days, and how dreadful that was. This change to the criminal law is going to do nothing in terms of the mentally Mr T. B. Sullivan: Take the point. You disadvantaged, the financially disadvantaged, are running away from the point. You are a the ethnically disadvantaged and the schoolyard coward and you know it. language disadvantaged people who come Mr GILMORE: It was not a cup that before our courts. Under this Code, more there was malicious damage to, it was the people will be coming before the Magistrates honourable member's brain and it suffered a Courts. We are going to stack our gaols with lot of damage. What the member for Brisbane Legislative Assembly 12639 15 June 1995

Central failed to tell this Parliament was the about other things. A number of members outcome of those trials, because that is the have spoken about the numbers of police and important ingredient. If that person was the administration of the criminal law through charged under the criminal law and he went to our police force. I would like to cover that. I trial by jury for two days for malicious damage recently accused the Minister for Police of to a cup and was found to be innocent, then allowing police numbers in the Mareeba police the law is seen to work. That is what he ought district of being 17 below establishment. A few to be entitled to. Would the honourable days later I was told, "No, it is not true. It is member opposite like to go to gaol for only 11 below establishment." I worked out something as trivial as that? why. They had changed establishment Mr Purcell: For a paper cup! Get on the numbers to make it look better. The right planet. establishment until that time had been 89 police for the whole of the district—— Mr GILMORE: I will not say any more. The honourable member, Mr Cement Boots, Mr Davies: What does "establishment" probably has been in gaol several times. The mean? It's not a term that is used anymore. Attorney-General a few moments ago took Mr GILMORE: Exactly. We do not use great offence indeed when somebody on this that term any more because it does not suit side of the House mentioned that euthanasia the Government's purposes. We will not talk might well slip through the net of this about that. What we will do is talk about legislation, might well become the outcome of something else. If we look at what Mr this legislation. He stood up in a great dander Fitzgerald said about police numbers in the and said, "That is not the intent and I have Mareeba police district we find that we are way tabled a piece of paper that demonstrates below. At a previous time and in a previous that." The gentleman here of great wisdom debate in this place the honourable member indicated that the judges would have to take for Mackay accused me of not doing my job account of that. because that police district did not have 99 Mr T. B. Sullivan: The law says they police as per the Fitzgerald inquiry. That was have to under the Acts Interpretation Act. back in 1989. The area now has several thousand more people, considerably more Mr GILMORE: The honourable member infringements of the law occur annually—and said that a while ago. It may not be the we have 84 police. Oh, no, we have not got Attorney-General's intent that that should 84 police, we have an establishment of 84 or happen but it may well be the outcome. We whatever fancy name honourable members do not necessarily have to take a rubber opposite want to call it, but the district is 11 hammer and flog somebody behind the ear to down on that. induce euthanasia. We can simply unplug a life support system or fail to provide the We have a 24 hour police station in necessities of life to a person who requires Atherton struggling along with eight men. If them. any policeman in the Tablelands area arrests people at 9 o'clock on a Saturday night—from Mr T. B. Sullivan: And this law covers Ravenshoe, Mount Garnet, Millaa Millaa or that. anywhere else up there—they have to be Mr GILMORE: I am sure it does. Would driven to Mareeba because there is nowhere the honourable member be delighted to be else to put them. They cannot be put in the lying leg up in a hospital somewhere on a lockup at the Atherton Police Station—brand respirator if somebody decided, "Well, we new, two cells, wonderful—because there are haven't got to give him a needle to kill him, we no police there to look after them. That is what will just unplug it." I would be sympathetic to the problem is. If one person is arrested on that if someone did that to the honourable Saturday night in Ravenshoe, that town is member. I think we should leave the law as it effectively without police for three hours. I am is just in case—— supposed to stand here and cop that. I am supposed to say, "That's fine because the Mr Wells: Have you seen clause 86? It Government says it is all right and is relevant to what you are talking about now. 'establishment' doesn't mean anything any Mr GILMORE: Here he is getting more, etc." offended. Mr Laming: It's no beat-up. Mr Wells interjected. Mr GILMORE: No, there is no beat-up Mr GILMORE: The outcome may well about this; this is serious stuff. It has been a be that we have some problems. I would like long and difficult debate about a piece of to spend a couple of minutes now speaking legislation which ought not to be in this 15 June 1995 12640 Legislative Assembly

Parliament today. My parliamentary leader has "(1) A person in charge of anyone said that; the member for Indooroopilly has who cannot provide himself or herself with said that; everybody on this side of the House the necessaries of life must provide the has said that they have grave concerns. The necessaries of life to the other person. member for Brisbane Central did not say that. (2) A person is in charge of anyone if He has got no concerns. As a practising the other person cannot withdraw from solicitor, at least he was practising in soliciting the charge for any reason, including, for for a while. Honourable members opposite example, age, sickness, unsoundness of appear to be following blindly the edict of the mind or lawful or unlawful detention. Attorney-General as he takes his place in history. I think that is great for them that they (3) It is immaterial how the other are backbench members—cannon fodder— person came to be in the charge of the not prepared to look past the bottom line. It is person on whom the duty is imposed." an awful shame, but I cannot support this Clause 86 states that a person who violates legislation. I am quite sure that nobody on this clause 87 causes the result. One who causes side of the House will. death commits homicide. That is clearly what it says. There is no other way to interpret it. Mr BENNETT (Gladstone) (4.07 p.m.): It is with great pleasure that I enter this debate I am fed up in this debate with listening to on this historic document that comes before honourable members opposite getting up in us today in the new Queensland Criminal turn trying to scare the community about Code. It is historic because it is the first redraft euthanasia. I am totally 100 per cent opposed of the Code for about 100 years. It is a great to the Northern Territory legislation on pleasure to be recorded in Hansard during this euthanasia. I opposed euthanasia and I would debate. not support any Bill in this House that purported to legalise euthanasia. It is very unfortunate to have to follow the honourable member for Tablelands in this Mr T. B. Sullivan: The Attorney- debate. He debated in his theatrical and General said publicly sometime ago that nonsensical way. I do not know what it was euthanasia was not, and is not, on the about. I cannot understand it, but one thing Government's agenda. They ignore that and that disturbed me about his contribution to the they try to make the lie out of those debate was that he went on about statements. euthanasia, euthanasia by stealth. I think he Mr BENNETT: The honourable member did that for political reasons, because is quite correct. I cannot understand why they Opposition members know there is an election keep bringing up this subject in debate. I coming up this year and they want to run believe they are being purely political—it is around trying to scare anybody who will listen typical conservative politics. As to typical to them. I will read from the new Criminal Code conservative politics during the Joh era—in for the benefit of the members of this House 1985, I was an electricity worker and I and for the benefit of the honourable member remember the Electricity (Continuity of Supply) for Tablelands, who said that he read it, but I Act 1985, I remember the Electricity (Industrial do not believe he did. Clause 86 of the Bill Causes and Continuity of Supply) Act 1985 states— and I remember the Industrial (Commercial Practices) Act 1985, which took away my rights "(1) This part imposes duties, but as a citizen of this State. Those Acts state does not create offences. that, if I am charged with a breach of those (2) If a person contravenes a duty Acts, the onus is upon to me to prove myself imposed on the person by this part, the innocent, not upon the State to prove me person is taken to cause any effect that guilty. The former Government took away my the contravention of the duty has on the rights. I found it insulting at the time. When life, health or safety of anyone for whom they passed that Joh Act, how can members the duty is imposed. opposite rise in this House and deliver the (3) A person is not criminally diatribe that they have been delivering one responsible for an act because of the after another during this debate? That was person's contravention of a duty imposed conservative politics and that is why by this part unless the Act amounts to conservatives should stay in Opposition. gross negligence." The contributions of the Opposition members are so full of false fears and end-of- Clause 87, under the sub heading "Duty to the-world material that, as a style of debate, it provide necessaries", states— cannot be taken seriously by the people of Legislative Assembly 12641 15 June 1995

Queensland. The course that they are (i) inserts a part of the following in this debate on the Criminal Code person's body, other than Bill does them no credit, and I believe that it all the penis, or inserts boils down to politics. The Government has anything else into the other the guts to introduce this very important person's vagina, vulva or legislation—which has been five years in the anus; or making, has involved extensive consultation, (ii) inserts the person's penis and has been redrafted several times—in an into the other person's election year. We will stand by the legislation mouth . . ." that we introduce. The talk about panic and polls is absolute nonsense. I believe that that offence has not been called rape because, if it were, it would be more The Attorney-General visited Gladstone difficult to obtain convictions. The term and spoke to 60 women about the new "serious sexual assault" has the same Queensland Criminal Code, particularly penalties as rape, but provides juries with the stalking laws and sexual assault. The understanding of the offence that they need Attorney-General allayed all of their concerns to convict in such cases. It will make about the Code and they left that meeting prosecutions easier. I support fully the expressing their approval. Much of the Attorney-General's position in relation to that feedback that I am receiving in my office section of the Bill. demonstrates the community's approval of the Another matter that was raised during the Bill that we are debating. meeting in April between the 60 women and Time after time in this debate, members the Attorney-General in Gladstone related to of the Opposition have mentioned Rob corroboration in rape and sexual assault O'Regan. I believe Rob O'Regan is a fine cases. Women will no longer be treated as Queenslander. He made a significant second-class citizens under the law. Before contribution to the Criminal Justice this legislation, the judge would caution the Commission and to the law of this State. A jury about the use of uncorroborated point in the original draft that he brought evidence. The term "corroboration" is used to forward with which I disagree relates to rape refer to independent evidence of any kind that and sexual assault. In his draft of the Code, may tend to support the evidence of any rape was not offence. He had it recorded as witness in a case, normally the complainant in degrees of sexual assault. I admit that I am a sex case. Under the current Criminal Code, not a lawyer and have not had any legal corroboration of the prosecution evidence is training, but I believe that, if a prosecutor required, as a matter of law, as proof of certain takes a case of sexual assault to a jury, he or offences such as perjury, treason, sedition, she will find it harder to obtain a conviction false claims, and giving false evidence before than if it was a case of rape. The community Parliament. In addition, for some other understands the word "rape". Clause 116, offences, whilst not requiring corroboration as under the heading "Rape" states— a matter of law, rules of practice require judges "A person must not have sexual in their summing-up to warn the jury of the intercourse with anyone without the other danger of acting on the uncorroborated person's consent." testimony of any witness. Those rules apply to two categories of witness, namely, an That is the community understanding of rape. accomplice of the accused and a complainant I believe that removing the reference to rape in a trial for a sexual offence, including the in the Code, the way Rob O'Regan did in his evidence of children. draft, would have made it more difficult to Under this legislation, the judge does not obtain convictions. During the drafting of this have to direct the jury on the dangers of Code, I received many representations, as I uncorroborated evidence. In rape cases, believe did many other members, from groups women are no longer being treated as that were opposed to the introduction of an second-class citizens in relation to their offence of serious sexual assault. The Bill evidence. I agree entirely with that. I believe states— that it will make it easier to obtain convictions "A person must not unlawfully and in rape cases. The member for Gregory said indecently assault anyone. that rape is a terrible offence. I agree with him. Maximum penalty— It is a terrible offence, but it is also a terrible offence to be unable to obtain convictions in (a) life imprisonment, if the court and allowing rapists to roam free. The Bill person— takes care of the rights of women. 15 June 1995 12642 Legislative Assembly

I support the Bill. It is an historic person who is reasonably educated can document. I believe it is one that should be understand the law. supported unanimously by the Parliament and It is quite true that, although the Code is I urge the Opposition to take off their political over 100 years old, it is written in remarkably hats for a while, be sincere and support the simple English. When one compares it with Bill. other legislation that was drafted in the 1940s Mr FITZGERALD (Lockyer) (4.18 p.m.): and the 1950s, one sees that the Code does I believe that this is a political Bill. It is a Bill not contain any herewiths, wherefores or other that has been designed by Government legal jargon. If people read the Code, they will members to bring into the political debate their understand what it means. What should be solution to their law and order problems. In the design of a Criminal Code, and what do their eyes this Bill is designed to bring peace we as a community want from this criminal and happiness, truth and justice, religion and justice system? First of all, I believe that piety throughout the land. I believe that that is people want the innocent to be acquitted. their interpretation of bringing in tough Members have not spoken about that during penalties. They are going to be tough on law this debate. The second point is that people and order. This Code has been promised for want the guilty to be convicted. Those are the five years, and now, on the eve of the death basic things that people want. of this Parliament, it has been introduced. During this debate, we have heard Everyone in this House is aware that this members talk about offences such as rape legislation cannot become law until at least the and how, under this legislation, more people end of 1996 and probably 1997. Other will be convicted of rape. Surely the justice legislation has to be introduced, such as the system should allow an accused person, who summary offences Bill, the Jury Bill, is innocent, to go free and be deemed to be amendments to the Penalties and Sentences innocent. That is surely an equally important Act and other complementary legislation point. An innocent person must not be before this Bill can become law. However, convicted and the safeguards must be in great concern exists in the community that place to protect an innocent person suspected something has to be done about law and of a crime. Anybody can be suspected of a order, so the Government has introduced this crime, but we must have those safeguards in legislation. place. Those safeguards include giving people I ask you, Mr Deputy Speaker, do you a right to a trial by a jury of 12 of their peers for believe that if this Bill replaces the present a range of offences. At present, under the Criminal Code it will solve all the existing law Queensland system, jury verdicts must be and order problems? Will it bring peace and unanimous. I know that in many other places, happiness, truth and justice throughout the such as the United Kingdom and some other land? Will it make any difference? If it does States of Australia, verdicts do not have to be not make any difference, it has not achieved unanimous. However, this legislation states that objective. that verdicts on criminal matters must be With regard to the toughness of the unanimous. Some people disagree with that; penalties—I contend that under this Code they say that sometimes that can cause a many offences will not result in any greater miscarriage of justice, and that verdicts should penalty. not be unanimous. Some people believe that it is sufficient for only 11 jury members to Mr Briskey: That is up to the judiciary. agree or, as is the case in England, for only 10 Mr FITZGERALD: Of course it is up to jury members to agree. The case studies in the judiciary. Therefore, it is dependent upon Queensland show very few hung juries. this legislation, this new tough legislation However, the people who approve of majority about which the Attorney-General is saying, verdicts argue that specifying that verdicts "We have introduced the toughest legislation must be unanimous causes many hung juries. in Australia." Under the Code, the prosecution must I believe that we should first ask prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. It is not ourselves: what is the objective of a criminal a probability; it is beyond reasonable doubt. code? We know that it codifies offences that Under the Code, we have the system of the are deemed to be of a criminal nature. We Court of Appeal, which may grant leave for an know that we had no criminal code until the appeal on various grounds, including leave to criminal law was codified by Samuel Griffith. appeal because it was unsafe for a jury to We know that when Samuel Griffith presented convict a person on the evidence that was his legislation he made comments about it provided. I suggest that the scales of justice being drafted in simple English so that any are gradually being tipped in favour of the Legislative Assembly 12643 15 June 1995 criminal. Those laws were set in place over Codes have been redrafted, and the offences 100 years ago, and for a long period before have been located all over the place. The that the common law system had evolved drafting style has also changed. The tabled from the English system. I will outline the Code referred to "anyone who does an act or severity of penalties that existed during those makes an omission." It was not until I reached days. clause 7 of this latest Criminal Code that I Recently, I read about the case of a found that any "act" takes in an omission. pickpocket who was picked up in London and There were different drafting styles for the dragged before a court. The prosecutor said, drafts of the Code. However, anyone such as "Your Honour, I know he did it, and you know, myself who is trying to compare one draft with too." He was convicted. At that stage, the another in order to find out what changes were accused could not utter one word in his own made suddenly comes across those changes defence. He was convicted and sentenced in in drafting styles. Many, many changes have under three minutes. That was the law then. been made to the Code. The Code has been redrafted, and clauses have been joined Mr Hollis: And they sent him to together. For example, clause 237 of the Australia. legislation refers to procuring sexual acts by Mr FITZGERALD: The member deception or coercion. That clause states— mentions Australia. Australia's $20 note has a "A person must not procure anyone picture of a lady on one side of it. I cannot for the purpose of the other person remember her name—it begins with an "M"— engaging in a sexual act." but she was convicted in England as a 14- year-old for borrowing a squire's horse. She That clause goes on to refer to deception, went for a ride on it and then returned it. Her threats or intimidation. As contained in the sentence for horse theft was to be transported original draft Criminal Code, that clause was a to New South Wales. She came out here as a doozey. Clause 147 of the December 1994 14-year-old. That was the law in those days, draft referred to procuring sexual acts and I believe it had a lot to answer for. dishonestly or by coercion. It stated— Therefore, I believe that the scales of justice "A person must not dishonestly, or by are gradually being tipped more and more in threats or intimidation, procure someone the favour of the criminals. We hear many else to engage in a sexual act." defence lawyers squealing for the loopholes to That clause then goes on to refer to the remain in the Code so that they can get their penalties. I wonder how the Code was clients off. I suppose it is their right to say that. released with that clause in it. Of course, the I refer to the introduction of the final report question was asked: what if somebody said, of the Criminal Code Review Committee to the "Of course, I love you", and then was able to Attorney-General dated June 1992. In that have his way with a lady, and that person did report, Mr O'Regan stated— not love that lady, would that be dishonest? "In 1897 architect of the Code, the Members have heard those comments: "Of then Chief Justice of Queensland, course, I will love you in the morning." I will not Samuel Griffith, wrote that his aim had go on with other statements that are made by been to reduce the criminal law to writing an amorous young man to a very nubile 'in such a form that any intelligent person young lady. Of course, that clause was able to read can ascertain what it is.' " amended in the later draft. We have to read such clauses to find out what the hang has However, a number of changes have happened to them. been made to this proposed Criminal Code. I know that the Attorney-General has gone to Of course, this Criminal Code has deleted quite some lengths to bring in this Code. We references to post, telegraphs, customs, had the O'Regan report—as I refer to it—which coinage, shipwrecks and prize fights. Some was released with a draft code; then we had members who have a boxing background the 1994 Criminal Code Bill; then we had the might be interested to learn that the law one that the Attorney-General tabled in this relating to prize fights referred to fights that are House. He said, "This is the Criminal Code." not limited by time. It was an interesting law. He went on TV and said, "This is the tough Courts have interpreted that section as new law." Then, we had the introduced meaning that people could engage in a fight Criminal Code. I defy anyone to run through for 15, three-minute rounds and belt the clause by clause the offences in the Code that daylights out of each other, but they could not deal with perjury, riot, rape, sexual offences do so if the fight did not have a time limit. and search warrants and tell me where they Prize fights were illegal, but boxing are located in each proposed Code. Those tournaments, during which people boxed for 15 June 1995 12644 Legislative Assembly

15, three-minute rounds were quite legal. I Mr Distant had seen people carrying know that that was a rather interesting sticks and had walked out on the footpath interpretation of boxing, but over the years towards them. He was then joined by his that was how the law was decided. son Shane who was carrying a tent pole, Unfortunately, this Criminal Code has and who threw him a dog chain. deleted references to cattle duffing. I know Mr Hunter said they then saw that that offence is covered by other another group of 20 to 30 people, some provisions, but it is a very, very sensitive area. of whom were armed with timber and iron Other Opposition members have referred to it bars. at quite some length. Of course, under this Code there has been a major change to the Mr Hunter said a young male ran at definition of "riot". The recommendation is that Mr Dennis Distant with a weapon and if 12 or more people are behaving in a struck him across the head while another tumultuous manner, it is deemed to be a riot. struck him in the leg with a piece of wood. However, the present Code states— He was kicked a number of times and lost consciousness." "When three or more persons, with intent to carry out some common Under the present Code, that is not a riot. purpose, assemble in such a manner, or Even though 20 or 30 people were charging being assembled, conduct themselves in around, only five were convicted. If honourable such a manner, as to cause persons in members read some of the decisions of the the neighbourhood to fear on reasonable Court of Appeal on what is a riot, they would grounds that the persons so assembled realise that that is not a riot because only five will tumultuously disturb the peace . . ." or six were charged, even though there were more people involved. The present Code The wording has been changed to 12 persons deals with this area under different sections— instead of three. A lot of people would say, sections 61, 62 and 63 cover unlawful "You can't have a riot with three people." assemblies and riots. The Court of Appeal However, when honourable members start differentiated between the sentencing seeing what has happened in the courts, we sections—sections 62 and 63—and section realise that not only must people be acting in 61, the section that covers unlawful the same fashion at the one event but also assemblies and riots. The issue becomes they all have to be convicted of it. For bound up in the words. example, the police may be able to charge seven, eight or ten people out of 30 people Mr Deputy Speaker, the argument that I with affray. For example, during a riot in a city, am presenting to you is that, because of these town or a gaol, when windows are being changes in the form of words between the smashed, cars are being turned over and present and proposed Codes, a great change fence palings are being pulled out, how can in the law will take place, which will take a long the police be expected to gather evidence time to determine. This is happening because sufficient to be able to prove beyond the Court of Appeal has made judgments with reasonable doubt that a person did such and respect to what constitutes a riot, who is such? For example, in a prison riot, police involved and how the numbers in a riot are officers and warders would be too busy putting counted. down the riot to collect evidence. As an The form of the words will also be example, I cite the following comments in the changed with respect to how a person is Toowoomba Chronicle of 28 October 1992— charged in relation to a number of similar "A District Court jury has convicted sexual offences involving children. I was very five of six people accused of taking part in pleased to see that change introduced. For a riot outside a Toowoomba home on example, at present, take the case of a January 12. complaint to the police with respect to a dirty The sixth person was acquitted." old man who is alleged to have interfered with a female minor. After the police make some That is fair enough. Honourable members inquiries, they might discover that another might say, "That wasn't a very big riot." young girl had said that that dirty old man had However, some of the earlier press reports on done exactly the same things to her, or her the same event stated— allegations were very similar—the modus "Mr Hunter said the jury would hear operandi was the same. And then there was a how Dennis John Distant saw a group of third complainant and then a fourth. We may people gathering outside his house in be talking about a stepfather or anyone Ruthven Street. involved with child molestation. Unfortunately, Legislative Assembly 12645 15 June 1995 this is a typical case of what is happening a lot most highly regarded group in our community. in our society. One of the criticisms that I hear most about With respect to such a case, the present our occupation is that we are continually law means that a judge would be very loath to arguing, that is, whatever the Government allow all of those cases to be heard at once, suggests the Opposition opposes and even though they happened within a whatever the Opposition might suggest the reasonable period. Even though the girls were Government opposes and so on. So we not playmates, it may be feared that there spend most of our time yelling and screaming could be some concoction. This came about at each other and finding little positive to say because of a decision by the full court of the about what the other side of politics High Court of Australia—45/88. The High Court recommends with respect to the government said that where there is a possibility of of the State or the country. concoction, each should be tried separately. At the outset, I say I am very Therefore, there was a separate jury for each disappointed with the Opposition's response to case. Therefore, a child came in and gave her the Criminal Code that we are debating today. evidence. After cross-examination, the jury With the exception of the member for Lockyer, said, "There is some doubt", so the accused who did make some attempt to debate the was let go. Then there has to be a separate issues involved in the Bill, most—if not all—of jury and a separate case for the next accused. the other members of the Opposition simply And of course it has the same fate. But would proposed that the Bill should not be accepted not a reasonable juror hearing the evidence of and that it should be returned and rejected. I one child after the other say, "Every kid is simply do not accept the view that such telling exactly the same story." The defence important legislation as this consisting of over would try to establish that there was a 400 clauses can be totally unacceptable to the concoction. For example, if they are playmates Opposition. I am very disappointed, as I have or if they go to the same school, they could said, that it has approached the consideration get their heads together. Obviously, that is a of this important piece of legislation in that great defence. That defence needs to be manner. there, too; people have imaginations, even I would draw some parallels with the Local young people. Therefore, the accused is Government Act, which was also first written protected. close to 100 years ago. Over those years, it One of the great barristers of this State has served a purpose and stood the test of took that case through the court, and he will time. I do not think that anyone would be able to tell his grandchildren about it for seriously suggest that the Local Government many years to come. That barrister has drawn Act was not due for review. To give credit on this for a long time. The barrister in the where it is due, the late Russ Hinze probably case was none other than Matthew Foley, a initiated review of the Local Government Act. present member of this House. I am very That was a review that the Labor Party in pleased to see that this legislation—the Hoch Opposition and later in Government was case—will be overturned, because this pleased to support. Just as the criminal law in legislation has the right to determine what the this State needs review and reconsideration, laws of this State are. Although all of those so did the Local Government Act, and I provisions must be there to protect the suggest that the debate today should have accused if he or she is innocent, we must also proceeded on that basis. Some of the have legislation that will convict the guilty. Opposition speakers today suggested that there have been some 60 amendment to the As I said before, there are many changes Criminal Code over the years. That in itself to the words in this legislation. It will be many suggests that a review was long overdue. Any years before the new law of the State of reasonable person would believe that, if a Bill Queensland will be determined even if this has had to be amended 60 times during that legislation is put into place straightaway. As period to take account of changes that have our spokesman said, the Opposition will be occurred, the appropriate response would be a opposing this legislation on the grounds of total overhaul and review of the Bill itself. uncertainty. There are 460 clauses contained I join Government members in in the Bill; it is impossible in a 20-minute congratulating the Minister and suggesting speech to cover the whole ambit of the that he will go down in history for the Criminal Code of Queensland. courageous decision to undertake a major Mr McELLIGOTT (Thuringowa) review of the Code, which impacts on all of our (4.38 p.m.): I am sure that all members of this lives and which in many respects governs the House understand that politicians are not the way in which the community itself operates. To 15 June 1995 12646 Legislative Assembly some extent, this is probably one of the most Through the new Code, the Government important pieces of legislation that I have seen certainly has done that. People do expect in my 12 years in this place—exceeded in tougher sentences. There is a perception that importance only by the Health Services Act criminal activity is on the increase. It depends and the Health Commission Act, which I which set of statistics one listens to as to the introduced as Minister for Health some years extent of that increase; but, as we in politics ago! understand, it is perception that is important. It is essential that in considering the Code There certainly is a perception that crime is on we look at the causes of crime and the the increase, and that therefore demands a expectations of the community in respect to Government response. those who perpetuate criminal activity. It is I do not accept the view that has been something of a shame that, particularly at expressed by a number of Opposition election time, we become involved in a kind of speakers that so-called light sentences are the auction as to who can be tougher or introduce fault of Government. I am sure that all the toughest responses to crime. It is a pity members have been approached by a that, instead of concentrating our efforts on constituent who has been robbed or bashed the response to crime, we do not spend more or whatever in the expectation that their time considering what causes people to member can prevail upon the judicial system engage in unsociable activity. I suppose that to ensure that the perpetrator of that crime is that is a debate for another day. Clearly, in this given a harsher penalty. Of course, it would be day and age, one of the major contributors to totally improper for us as members of this the commission of crime around the world is place to interfere with the judicial system, and the relatively high levels of unemployment. In we rightly leave it to that system to determine other countries, people actually steal, bash, the penalties to be imposed. What rob or even murder simply to stay alive—to Governments can do—and what we are doing sustain themselves and their families. through this Code—is lay down the penalties that may be imposed on a perpetrator by the We are not in that situation in Australia; in courts. That is as far as we go. From then on, fact, our position is quite the opposite. Our it is in the hands of the judge or the society is incredibly commercialised. We are magistrate. told every day, particularly on television in the evenings, that any self-respecting household This is a vexed question. Victims of crime should have a video, a car, a boat and all of in particular and also the general community those sorts of items. People who are not in a expect that people who engage in illegal position, through unemployment or for activity will be punished for their crime and that whatever reason, to have those things by the punishment handed out will be a deterrent legitimate means will certainly be tempted to in the hope that that person will not commit obtain them illegally. Those are the sorts of similar crimes in the future. Thinking people in issues that we really should be debating. They the community also expect that there will be are very complex issues. some sort of rehabilitation program to attempt to ensure that, having embarked on a career Traditionally, sport has provided an outlet of crime, that person does not continue the for young people in our community in their pursuit of those sorts of activities. I hope that leisure time. Unfortunately, the sorts of things people do not continue to recommend that which are happening today in Rugby League our police forces need larger guns and faster and which will happen in other sports mean cars. We would not want our country to be like that we are rewarding more and more those America, where the situation can be described who are the stars—the elite participants in as warfare on the streets. That is regrettable, sport. Increasingly, there will be a withdrawal of and we do not want it to occur in Australia. support for people who are simply taking part This issue needs careful consideration to in sport for the love of it or for the enjoyment ensure that that does not occur. of their leisure time. A feeling will develop among those people that they are unable to During the recent controversy about home make it, that they are unable to command the invasion, some people have suggested that, if big dollars and the big status in sport, and somebody enters a person's home illegally, they may seek their rewards through illegal that person has every right to shoot the practices. This is a complex argument and one intruder dead. I have heard it said that, if the which we cannot debate in the context of the criminals know that a household has a gun at new Code. the ready, they will not commit the crime. That is nonsense. Burglaries and break-and-enter There is an expectation in the community offences will continue to be committed. that the Government will respond to crime. Householders being armed merely means that Legislative Assembly 12647 15 June 1995 the people intent on that sort of activity will punished inmates who played up by ensure that they also go armed for protection, imprisoning them in the black hole at Boggo and the problem simply escalates. Road. I have seen the shocking conditions I want to cite a case that occurred in my that existed in B Block at Boggo Road and at electorate which illustrates graphically the Stuart Creek in Townsville. Certainly there were difference in attitudes between the no rehabilitation programs to try to ensure that Government and the Opposition on the matter people who engaged in criminal activities saw of home invasion. A resident of my electorate the error of their ways. was sick and was lying down in the bedroom. I well recall speaking to the mother of two Normally, he would have been at work. The young children in Townsville whose husband house had a "for sale" notice at the front, and was continually getting into trouble. She told this led two high school children—they were me that the greatest problem that she had described as high school children in the was that every time her husband was released newspaper reports, so I assume that their age from prison, the first thing he did was to return was 15 or 16 or somewhere around there—to to the pub with his mates and the whole cycle believe that the house was probably empty, started again. That is what got him into trouble and they forced their way into the lounge in the first place. It is important that programs room. The noise that they made alerted the are in place to try to ensure—and we can only attention of the resident, who came out of the try—that that does not happen. bedroom to find those two high school kids in The article to which I referred earlier his lounge room. He was quoted as saying says— that he did not know who got the biggest "The change is demonstrated by fright—them or him. They posed such a threat to him that they agreed to remain with him figures: In 1988 the department spent while he called the police. The police came $6000 on rehabilitation programmes for around, took them off and presumably read prisoners, today that figure is $5 million a the riot act to them to ensure that that did not year." happen again. Obviously, there is a substantial difference between the attitude of this Government and Those two young kids certainly did the that of the previous Government. wrong thing. They should not have been in that house. There is no doubt that they were Mr Hamburger made a couple of other intent on some sort of criminal activity. Under points that I think are worth putting on the the policies espoused by the members for record in the context of this debate. He Caloundra and Crows Nest in particular, those expressed grave concerns about the so-called young people would have been shot dead, notion of truth in sentencing. He said— and those members would have defended "There would be no correctional that action. That is a clear illustration that the institution administrator in Australia who response to home invasion and the response would support that concept." to criminal activity generally is not as simple as Mr Hamburger goes on to say— blasting away the people who might engage in activities with which we do not agree. " 'When a judge gives someone five years, she/he is very learned in the law I mentioned also the need for and knows that that person can apply for rehabilitation. A very interesting article in parole after 2 1/2 years. They know we yesterday's Courier-Mail quoted Keith have a series of hostels and we go from Hamburger, the Director-General of the release-to-work to home detention to Corrective Services Commission, at length. Mr parole. Hamburger made some very important points about the need for rehabilitation programs. 'So in the full knowledge of all that, The article mentioned that his appointment they say five years. followed the release of the Kennedy inquiry 'If the judge wanted the person to report in 1988, which slammed the inhumane serve five years in gaol he would give a conditions in the Queensland prison system 10-year sentence.' " and its lack of emphasis on rehabilitation. It is as simple as that. He goes on to make the I certainly recall the days when I was very telling point— Opposition spokesman on prisons and I saw " 'If you are going to follow the knee- for myself the infamous black hole at Boggo jerk reaction of some people in the Road—and we are talking about the late community of "let's hang them, let's flog 1980s; we are not going back to the Boer War them, let's starve them, let's keep them in or anything like that. The former Government austere conditions and give them nothing 15 June 1995 12648 Legislative Assembly

for five years and throw them back out on Qld Government to deliver high quality the street" all the evidence says those health care to all its residents. people will reoffend, and usually in a more In support of my argument I submit violent way, because they become very the following information: bitter people.' " Life prolonging treatment is usually I wanted to conclude my contribution by not desired by dying patients as it may referring to the clause in relation to palliative prolong their suffering rather than improve care. I think it is very unfortunate that some their quality of life. The majority of people have chosen to place an unfair and terminally ill patients are also rational and untrue interpretation on that clause. I want to able to therefore make their own read into the record of this place a letter which decisions in regards to the treatment they I received from a nurse who is involved in this wish to receive or not receive. This allows very special and caring employment as a health care providers to uphold the provider of palliative care. I think it is principle of patient autonomy. disappointing that the point of view of health workers has not so far been considered in this The existence of the possibility of debate. It is this sort of response from health doctors and nurses transgressing the law care workers that indeed has prompted the on accelerating the dying process, may inclusion of that clause in the new Bill. She prevent some patients from receiving says— appropriate palliative care." "As a registered nurse I am I think that is a critical point. The letter concerned with the fear of litigation that is continues— present amongst my colleagues when "Changes to the current legislative requested/required to give large doses of framework are therefore recommended to narcotics to terminally ill patients who protect palliative carers from criminal or suffer from intolerable and intractable civil liability when a treatment has the pain. There are many situations in which effect of shortening the patient's life— the patients do not receive the necessary provided that the treatment is in pain relief medication due to this fear of accordance with the wishes of the patient, giving a potentially lethal dose of narcotic is given in good faith, without negligence with the possibility of hastening the and in accordance with the appropriate person's death, and the legal standards of palliative care." consequences of this action for the health The nurse quotes from a 1994 paper by Mr R. professionals concerned. Hunt titled "Palliative Care", which states— In my opinion, it is therefore necessary to amend current legislation in "Such legislation would give palliative order to allow health professionals the care patients, doctors and nurses greater legal ability to prescribe and administer licence in choosing appropriate methods large doses of narcotics to terminally ill to treat suffering at the end of life." patients who are suffering intolerable pain Her letter continues— and anguish. "In light of the above comments, I . . . would like to recommend that the Specifically, a clause is required to following clause be added to section 53 of clarify that health care providers would not the Criminal Code Bill 1994 for the be held criminally responsible following abovementioned reasons: instructions from the consumer that they A health professional should be only wish to receive palliative care and do protected from civil or criminal liability not wish to receive any life prolonging when providing palliative care in order treatment. to relieve a patient's pain or distress Furthermore in my opinion, it is even though an unintended professional and criminal negligence consequence of death may be when a person is left to suffer intolerable hastened by such care, unless the pain because a health care provider is not patient refuses such care." prepared to give adequate amounts of I think that sums up the reason for the narcotics due to fear of litigation. clause. It is not about euthanasia; it is simply Therefore, prevention of these about ensuring that the system in our occurrences through legislative changes hospitals, nursing homes and so on is able to would serve the community of provide the highest and best level of palliative Queensland and uphold the aim of the care by caring health professionals who simply Legislative Assembly 12649 15 June 1995 want to make life, or what is left of life, for there are nearly 1 million people out of work people with terminal illnesses as comfortable who would rather be working than on the dole. as they possibly can without fear of litigation I agree with the member for Thuringowa as a result of the actions that they might carry on the issue of unemployment. Only this out, as is pointed out in that article, in good week, during an Adjournment debate, I spoke faith, with the permission of the patient and in about unemployment. In my maiden speech, I accordance with the appropriate standards of suggested that the Government might palliative care. I think it is high time that consider having an all-party committee Opposition members stopped creating this address unemployment. I think it would be a impression of some ulterior motive in regard to more useful committee than some of the that clause and to accept the need to protect committees that we actually have. our health care professionals. The member for Thuringowa supported Mr LAMING (Mooloolah) (4.58 p.m.): I the fact that the Bill suggests that a magistrate preface my remarks tonight by referring to the or judge could use his or her discretion in statement in the Attorney-General's second- imposing lower penalties. It is disturbing to reading speech that he makes no apology for people in the wider community that criminals introducing a tough new Code, which I think are not serving their full sentences, and that was repeated in the media. It is unfortunate issue needs to be addressed. If the discretion that the Criminal Code is being used to of magistrates and judges is used too widely, perhaps patch up a perceived shortcoming in people get the impression that criminals are the Government's law and order policies. I do not serving penalties commensurate with their not know whether the Queensland Criminal crimes. Code, which is a century old, should have been debated at this time because of the Mr Bennett: Life in Queensland is an present state of law and order in Queensland. average of 17 and a half years, and in New South Wales it is 11. So they are serving their I note the member for Thuringowa's more time here. reasoned comments about argument in this Mr LAMING: That depends on the House. When we debate important legislation, crime. I am talking about the perception in the we seem to argue backwards and forwards. I community that criminals are not serving their suppose that is the nature of the beast. full sentences, and that is very high on the However, the Opposition has a role to play, that is, to oppose those clauses of a Bill with agenda. I will come back to the comments of which we disagree and, if we feel that they are the member for Brisbane Central a little later. bad enough and the Government is not I am not a solicitor, so I took advice on prepared to amend them during the this Bill—as I try to do with most Bills of a Committee stage, we have an obligation to technical nature that come before this House. the people we represent to oppose the Bill as I spoke with a leading barrister in Brisbane. His a whole. That is what the Opposition will do first comment was that completely revamping when this debate finally reaches that stage. this Bill introduces a great air of uncertainty. Certainty and a body of common law had built The member who spoke before me up behind the existing Criminal Code. By mentioned something with which I do agree, completely revamping the Code, that certainty that is, that perhaps we do not spend enough has been turned on its head. It might take time in this House addressing the reasons why many years to get back to a situation of some there is such a high level of crime. He certainty for all practitioners and, indeed, all mentioned unemployment, which is an issue people who come within the compass of the that I have raised repeatedly in this House. law, which is just about all of us. Mr Beanland: It's going up in Why do we need a new Code, and why Queensland. are some of these changes being introduced? Mr LAMING: The crime rate is going up I would like to restrict my remarks to a couple in Queensland, and that is most unfortunate. of the changes, one of which relates to However tempting it is to do so, we should not summary prosecution in proposed section be using this issue like a football and passing 320. I read that section and took advice on it. it backwards and forwards. When the The question arose: is it simply to save time unemployment rate goes up and down, we that we have this summary jurisdiction in the throw the ball backwards and forwards. Magistrates Courts, whereas previously some of these matters would have gone to a higher Mr Bennett: Trends. court? Perhaps it is. Is it to save money? My Mr LAMING: Even looking at the trends, adviser and I decided that costs would be the fact is that, while we debate those figures, saved in relation to juries, and costs would be 15 June 1995 12650 Legislative Assembly saved in relation to legal aid, which is not will be able to hold back a case for a crime available in the lower court. I wonder whether that might be punishable by up to 15 years' this is going to bring on a push for legal aid to imprisonment, if he keeps that case in the be brought down to the lower court as well. Magistrates Court he is able to inflict a penalty That is something that remains to be seen. If of only two years' imprisonment. Where this is a mechanism to save funds, I must offences might have attracted a greater confess that it is a clever manoeuvre, because punishment, this will now be restricted to two it probably will have that effect. However, in years' imprisonment. That could have the some cases that could be at the cost of overall effect of lowering the average length of justice. sentences. Perhaps another reason for this change Government members have said that was to unclog the higher courts, and one they make no apology for bringing in a tough cannot argue with that mission. As my learned new Criminal Code. I really think that was an adviser told me, it is a matter of getting the unwise appellation to attach to this very cases through the "sausage machine"—his important legislation. This Code could actually words, not mine. Whatever the reason for this result in less justice because of the inability of particular change to the Code, we will transfer people to take their cases before juries and some of the backlog from the higher courts to the possibility of softer penalties being the Magistrates Court. However, a most imposed. That would actually be a backward important effect will be the erosion of a step. If the Attorney-General is really citizen's right to be judged by a panel of his or interested in the law and order debate, her peers. I am told that the right to be judged perhaps the real problems have been has been a part of the legal system for about overlooked, because in many respects they do 700 years. I suppose it is easy for not come within the compass of this Bill. parliamentarians, judges, practitioners and It is undeniable, in my opinion, that we prosecutors to say that minor crimes have to have too few police—and I recognise that this be pushed through the system and must not is not something that comes within the be allowed to clog it up and that we have to Attorney-General's portfolio. I have spoken to save money. However, when people are a lot of police, and they tell me that they are charged with some of these offences, we frustrated because in many respects they sometimes run the risk of failing to remember have too few powers. The courts are what effect it can have on their lives. emasculated by the Penalties and Sentences A constituent of mine has been in touch Act and, in some respects, the Juvenile with me on two occasions and has also Justice Act. Members have already debated contacted his Federal member. I have even that legislation in this House. Our gaols and written to the Attorney-General on this matter. watch-houses are too full, and that must I will not mention the man's name, but he was influence magistrates not to sentence people charged with a drug offence. He is now in to gaol terms. People are starting to believe good employment and is married, but he that offenders are not serving their full cannot enter the United States with that sentences. The new Criminal Code is rather a conviction hanging over his head. Even if that blunt instrument to be thrown into the law and conviction is erased in Australia, he cannot order debate. A comment was made by the enter the United States to further his career. member for Brisbane Central, who is not in the He told me that had he known of the House at the moment. ramifications for his future life, he would have Mr Beattie: Yes I am. taken the matter to a higher court. Under the new Code, people in similar cases would not Mr LAMING: He is not sitting in his be able to take their cases to the higher court correct seat; it is no wonder that I did not where they could be judged by their peers; notice that he was here. The member for they would be judged by a magistrate. My Brisbane Central made the incredible remark learned adviser tells me that magistrates tend that this is some sort of a beat-up. I assure to be harsher in their judgments than do juries, him that this is something that we are not because juries usually comprise quite beating up, because we do not have to beat reasonable people. I take his advice on that. up the law and order issue. Therefore, we are going to load up the Mr Beattie: You tell Mr Cooper that. Magistrates Court, and this is going to erode Mr LAMING: That is the No. 1 concern citizens's rights—in his and my opinion. of Queenslanders. It does not matter how they Penalties for particular crimes may in are polled, whether by telephone, by actual fact be less than they would have been questionnaire or by talking to them in the under the old system. Whereas a magistrate street, there is no doubt about it that criminals Legislative Assembly 12651 15 June 1995 serving their full sentences and law and order inquiry knocked their colleagues off one by in the streets are first and second priorities. one but left this lot remaining. These are the And there is daylight between second and people who, on the admission of Ahern and whatever comes third. I think there are quite a Leisha Harvey, in the electorate of Mackay few people on this side of the House who allowed psychiatric people to live in disgraceful know what those other concerns are, but we and appalling conditions—Leisha Harvey's are not going to tell honourable members words not mine. But, having said that, they opposite everything. But I will share that fact went on to try to move the psychiatric funding with them. They are always asking about our from the psychiatric ward to an operating policies. They can be damned sure that we theatre for private doctors. are going to have good policies to answer the They are also the people who in 1988 law and order problem, and they ain't a beat- had the patients in the Winston Noble up. If the member for Brisbane Central thinks it Unit—and as a relative of an in-patient is a beat-up he might like to come across this between then and now, I know—living in the evening to the meeting over in the annexe most disgraceful conditions. I have to concede where the families of victims of crime will be that over the last five or six years those meeting and tell them that he believes—— conditions have improved, but that process Mr BEATTIE: I rise to a point of order. I was not helped by the comments of one of am being misrepresented. I find those the backbenchers of the National Party during comments offensive and I ask that they be that time saying, "If you make them too withdrawn. I have not said that law and order comfortable they won't want to go home." This was a beat-up. I was simply quoting Mr is what honourable members opposite were Cooper. saying. This is their justice. This is what they Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr think about the people of Queensland. Bredhauer): Order! There is no point of order. I would also like to remind people about Mr LAMING: The member might like to the Commonwealth Games in Brisbane. It was go to that body and speak to some of the a time that was fairly sensitive to me. But if people who ring us—and I am sure that they honourable members can recall, the previous also ring his electorate office and complain. I Government brought in what was called the even hear around the electorates that when Commonwealth Games Bill. The Act was police get to these homes two or three hours designed to give police the right to regulate after a robbery has occurred, they say, the conduct of persons in or near notified "Please contact your local member to try to do areas or near to notified persons. It also gave something about it." It is certainly not a beat- the commissioned police officer the power to up. I would like to put the record straight in declare a state of emergency within specified that regard. It is a No. 1 concern and the Goss Commonwealth Games venues or notified Labor Government has failed. It has failed areas. The Act did not state, nevertheless, because law and order is the No. 1 issue in what was a notified area or who was a notified Queensland. It is the No. 1 responsibility of a person. State Government. It has failed in this regard, It was also an offence to carry a and that is one of the reasons that it is going prohibited thing in a notified area. As these to fail at the next State election. regulations were to be given by Order in Mrs BIRD (Whitsunday) (5.13 p.m.): It Council, they were not decided by Queensland was not my intention to speak this evening Parliament but indeed by the Cabinet. The but, due to the good grace of the Chair and marathon route became a notified area and the generosity of the Deputy Speaker in black people or white people could have been allowing some leniency, I thought I might say arrested for handing out political leaflets, a few words as well. The question that comes badges or banners. They were included as to mind in dealing with the Criminal Code and notified things. Then one could also end up some of the debate that has occurred here being arrested for simply wearing a land rights today is: who are these people that are T-shirt. Bob Wetherill pointed out— opposing this legislation? What do they know "There is nothing to stop this about justice and law and order? Government from reintroducing the These people are the dregs of the most Removal of Aborigines Act. This was a corrupt Government that has ever existed in piece of Queensland legislation used in Australia. These are the leftovers from the the past to remove Aborigines off the land Bjelke-Petersen regime. These are the ones or the towns into settlements and who got way. These are the ones who sat missions. It had also been used to here week after week while the Fitzgerald prevent Aborigines re-entering them." 15 June 1995 12652 Legislative Assembly

Let us also remember that it was member and the women in my electorate and Superintendent Ron Redmond who was in I will put my money on them any time. I want charge of the security of operations during the to say very quickly that I applaud the Games. He made a huge point of telling Attorney-General for introducing this Bill. It everyone that the then Queensland Police certainly is a brave Government that takes the Force was the first in Australia to employ time and undertakes the consultation to go professional journalists and to set up a media right through the current Code, introduce a and public relations section to help to improve, new one and indeed make the changes that as he called it, the information flow. He were necessary to make this a just State guardedly explained to the public the where law and order prevails. proposed use of the newly introduced P24 Mr HOBBS (Warrego) (5.20 p.m.): baton. It was a two-foot long, two-handed Following the diatribe from the previous baton which he claimed was a very effective member, it is obvious that this Government means of crowd control. If used correctly the has really not had a good, hard look at exactly unwieldy shaped baton could quickly pin a what it is putting before the people. It is victim's arm behind his back but in a violent obvious that we are in election mode. The brawl it has other lethal uses such as stabbing Government is rushing around in a general in the chest and being most obvious as used state of panic; the result is this cobbled by the police in New Zealand during the together legislation that it calls the Criminal Springbok tour demonstrations. Code. The Government is trying to give the My first insight into the old Criminal Code impression that it is tough on crime. The was in about 1987 when I attended a meeting Opposition has taken the law and order with the guest speakers, Father Brian Gore; agenda to the Government, and now it is the member for Mackay, Edmund Casey; and trying to put together a document that will the then shadow Attorney-General, Wayne show the people that it is trying to do Goss. Father Brian Gore talked extensively something about law and order. Time will tell about the corruption in the Philippines and the that, in most cases, what the Government has resultant poverty. Edmund Casey then talked put together will not work. The Government is about the corruption in Queensland with up to its old tricks again. We have seen its Bjelke-Petersen and the resultant poverty, and mirror tricks by which it pretends that all is well, there was no difference. They were both the but there is no doubt that panic reigns same. supreme. I first got my insight into what was to This legislation reminds me of the Building come for the Government in Queensland Units and Group Titles Act. The Government when Wayne Goss stood up that day and rushed that legislation through the House went through the Criminal Code, and went saying that it had consulted widely. What through the corruption that existed in happened? A few months later, the Queensland because of the Criminal Code. He Government introduced 60 amendments to declared that day that he was going to that legislation. The same thing will happen introduce a new Criminal Code, because with this legislation. The Government should amendment after amendment had made the withdraw this legislation. After all, it is not going current one unreadable, the reader having to to come into effect for a long time. It may not turn pages from one side to the other and to be until 1996 or 1997 that the Jury Bill, the try to make some sort of sense out of it. He Summary Offences Bill, the Police Powers Bill has done that. and other complementary legislation will come In conclusion, I want to refer to the before the House. As this legislation will not comments made by the Leader of the Liberal take effect for some time, I do not know why Party today in connection with women and the the Government is rushing around. It will be Criminal Code. Once it was introduced into the very interesting to listen to the debate at the House, I begged, borrowed and stole as many Committee stage, when the 460 clauses of the new Criminal Codes as I could and unfold tonight and tomorrow. distributed them widely through my electorate. Certainly, this document will have little Every women's group came back to me and effect on judicial decisions in my electorate. praised the new legislation to be introduced in Apart from this document, we need a connection with women—— memorandum of understanding or Mr Hobbs: They wouldn't understand it. guidelines—or perhaps in addition to it—which spell out to the judiciary society's expectations. Mrs BIRD: They couldn't understand it! The Government can have its Criminal Code, Can the honourable member understand it? I but magistrates' determinations will continue to will have a debate between the honourable differ. In very similar cases, one magistrate Legislative Assembly 12653 15 June 1995 may, for whatever reason, be far more lenient parked at the Charleville Airport. Apart from than another. This Bill will not solve that the occasion that I am about to outline, no- problem. one has ever interfered with that vehicle. One I have heard numerous stories in my guy broke out from the WORC camp, broke electorate about cases being heard after a into someone's home and pinched a carton of new magistrate has arrived. Of course, a beer and not a lot else. He broke into the criminal element builds up in those far-western meteorology office, pinched a bow and arrow, towns, which are probably not much different and I think he found something else there that from most towns. Those criminals will play the he wanted to take. When he got to my ref as close as they can to the whistle. If they vehicle, he broke a window. Not only did he can get away with it, they will. Community break that window but he also pinched a bottle service is the most common sentence of rum that I had on the seat. imposed, but most of those criminals do not Mr Mackenroth: That's better than the undertake that service because people are not member for Southport; he keeps a gun under available to supervise them; so it is a bit of a his seat. joke. There is no deterrent to stop them Mr Beattie: You'd have been shot! offending, so they continue. The police do a great job—a terrific job—in arresting those Mr HOBBS: That is right; one never can people. One particular magistrate in my tell. It was a 750-ounce bottle, too. One electorate was very soft on criminals. Finally, cannot even buy them now. That is how long it after a few changes, those circumstances had been in the car! It had not been used; I have improved, but it was really a serious had forgotten all about it. But the criminal situation. The police were beside themselves; found it. I was pretty dirty, because I did not they continued to pen those people, but the even get a drink out of it. He did not return it. magistrate would let them off. That really was In fact, no-one has returned it, so I have been unsatisfactory. a victim. It cost me the price of that car window. I had to vacuum the car, plus I lost In St George, people were so upset that my bottle of rum, which I kept for medicinal they held a public meeting to try to do purposes. something about what was happening in relation to law and order in that town. People Mr Beattie: It didn't work. could not walk the streets at night. People who Mr HOBBS: It did not work; that is true. I parked their cars two or three blocks from a note that the Government has extended some function or hotel they were attending risked offences. The Bill states that a person must being bashed or robbed. A visitor from over not operate a vehicle dangerously in a public the border stayed at a motel, walked place. In his second-reading speech, the downtown for a meal, got a hiding on the way Minister said that Part 4, Chapter 2 extends home and had his money stolen. The police the dangerous driving provision to cover were unable to do anything about that criminal dangerous operation of vehicles, vessels, element. Quite fairly, I do not think that aircraft and other types of conveyances, such situations such as those are addressed in this as surfboards. When I read that, I thought, "I legislation. Quite regularly, when many of the don't doubt that surfboards are dangerous." offenders who are sent to a home or prison So I checked in the Bill and found that the return to their areas, the offences start again. maximum penalty is 14 years' imprisonment, Often, people around the town or police and the minimum is three years' officers will say to me, "So and so is back in imprisonment. I am talking about a surfboard. town. We'll see what happens." Within a week I am not sure whether the Minister is going to or so, that person is again breaking into be riding the waves with those guys to try to places. That is a serious situation. catch them. I refer also to the WORC camp that is Mr Connor: Hanging five. based in Charleville. It is a rehabilitation centre for prisoners, and low-risk prisoners are sent to Mr HOBBS: Will the Minister be hanging that camp. Those prisoners did a great job five on a surfboard trying to catch them? during and after the 1990 floods, and the Fourteen years in the pen for an out of control camp has been there ever since. That was the surfboard seems a little strange to me. first WORC camp to be set up, and quite a few Perhaps somebody who is much wiser and have since been set up. I support that camp. has an understanding of the law could explain It is a good operation. However, I have been a that. Perhaps in his reply the Minister could let victim of one of those prisoners, and I will tell us know how he is going to handle that members the story. For the past seven— provision. nearly eight—years, I have left a vehicle An honourable member interjected. 15 June 1995 12654 Legislative Assembly

Mr HOBBS: We will be here at five in see the Government Bills that the Opposition the morning if it takes that long. has supported. The Government is intent on ensuring the An Opposition member: More than rights of the criminal. This has been borne out we have opposed. through the way that this issue has been Mr HOBBS: The Opposition has handled. I do not believe that the Government supported more legislation than it has has been serious about dealing with this issue. opposed. Government members have been making political statements. I understand why they are Mr Elder: How many times? doing that. However, in this legislation, not one Mr HOBBS: Numerous times. It is just provision enshrines more rights for the victim. that the Minister remembers the ones that the Earlier in the debate, the member for Opposition makes the Government work hard Gregory mentioned stock stealing. That is a at. The Government has said that it has very important issue. From the Captain consulted people in formulating this legislation. Starlight days, stock stealing has had a I do not know whether it really has consulted mystery about it. It is very hard to convict people because, if it really had, how come those who steal stock, particularly if they are everyone is against it? stolen in large numbers. I hope that such a Sir Samuel Griffith would turn in his grave provision exists somewhere in this legislation. I if he saw the butcher job the Government has note that a $10,000 fine applies to anyone done on his Code. The Criminal Code has convicted of stock stealing; that does not stood the test of time for nearly a century. I do seem a great deal. Perhaps the Minister may not doubt that there is a need to update it. be able to enlighten us a little more on that. Society is changing. There is less respect for The Government is not very good when it elders in the community. Discipline is comes to issues that relate to rural decreasing. As we all know, we have the drop- Queensland and the bush. Its track record on outs of society and repeat offenders. the railways and tree-clearing guidelines has Therefore, the Criminal Code does need to be not been very good, so I hope that it got this updated. I have no problem with that. one right. However, we have to make sure that, when If this legislation were effective, it would the Code is updated, it is not just a charade, have gained the support of the public. but that it will have teeth and be of some However, it appears that the Government has benefit to victims of crime and the community received unanimous disapproval. It has as a whole. received disapproval from the Law Society, the This legislation is similar to the land titles Bar Association, civil libertarians, Mr legislation. That legislation had stood the test O'Regan—the fellow who wrote the first of time for nearly a century. During that 100 drafts—the newspapers and the Opposition; it years, there was almost no fraudulent activity has everyone off side. in relation to land titles. The legislation cost A Government member interjected. $12.1m to implement and, one year later, the whole thing is falling to pieces. Mr HOBBS: That is not true. The Opposition would agree with this legislation if it I conclude on the issue of home was fair dinkum. The Opposition does not invasions. That is a particularly important and always disagree with Government legislation. I very topical offence to which all people can have supported Government legislation that relate. The home has now become an easy has been fair dinkum. In some cases, even target. Once, the criminals targeted banks and though the Opposition is not happy with some service stations, because that was where the clauses of Government legislation, it does not money was. Robbers could enter those call for a division. Generally speaking, if premises and obtain funds fairly easily. Government legislation is fair dinkum, the However, these days, it is becoming harder to Opposition will support it. However, in the case break into those places. They have better and of this legislation, the Government has much more sophisticated security systems that received unanimous disapproval. What a feat! can identify robbers very quickly. So the home is now the easy target; thus we need Mr Elder: How many times have you responsible legislation that assist the victims. given us support? The rights of the victim are particularly Mr HOBBS: I have given the important. I cite the case, as have many Government a lot of support on quite a few members in this House, of Mr Castorina at Bills. The Minister should refer to Hansard and Redcliffe. He lost his home. Legislative Assembly 12655 15 June 1995

Mr Dollin: That was under your financial assistance? Is that not fair and legislation. reasonable? It is not? Mr HOBBS: The Government has not Mr Connor: The silence is deafening. changed it. Mr HOBBS: The silence is deafening. Mr Dollin: Tell us what happened to the On that note, I rest my case. next fellow. Mr CONNOR (Nerang) (5.37 p.m.): To Mr HOBBS: It is the same legislation, quote Edmund Burke, "Bad laws are the worst and the same thing can happen again. The sort of tyranny", and these are bad laws. I rise only reason the Government changed its to speak to the Criminal Code Bill. I wish to attitude on the second occasion was that the make plain that what we are debating Opposition and the public put pressure on it. here—the Criminal Code—and the way it has Mr Castorina lost his home because he was been formulated are indicative of the way in defending his rights. Is that fair at all? Of which the Goss Labor Government is course it is not fair that he lost his home simply approaching the whole issue of crime and law because he was defending his safety and his and order in Queensland. Quite simply, the goods. He did not want a ratbag in his home. Goss Labor Government is reacting to the He wanted to defend himself and fight for his agenda rather than leading the agenda. life because some ratbag wanted to pinch his goods. That is not fair, and it is not right. Members may recall that, upon election in Genuine intruders who invade people's 1989, the Goss Labor Government spoke only property for criminal purposes should lose their of the jackboot mentality of the previous rights, particularly in relation to compensation National Party Government and this for injury. Is that fair? Government's new enlightened approach to law and order in Queensland. The Goss Labor Mr Elder: It's your legislation. Government spoke continually about the Mr HOBBS: I accept that that is an rehabilitation of offenders. Members may interpretation of the legislation. How come the recall it was also spruiking about how it had second person got away? reduced the number of prisoners behind bars, Mr Dollin: Because we changed the law. so much so that it could actually close down two prisons, Boggo Road and Woodford, and Mr HOBBS: No, the Government did not substantially reduce the size of other prisons, change the law. We are changing the law including the one at Townsville. tonight. Members may also recall the mass Mr Elder: Judges determine those escapes and mounting escape record as considerations. We don't determine those prison security collapsed as Labor took over considerations. the criminal justice system. Rehabilitation took Mr HOBBS: The member just said that it precedence over security in the prisons. We was the Opposition's legislation. Sure it was, then had a number of complaints about but since then there have been two cases of prisoners being released after completing only people being injured or killed during home one-third or even one-quarter of their invasions. In one case, Mr Castorina had to sentences. The Goss Government was then sell his house to fight his case, and the other reminded that its 1989 party platform included guy did not. It is the same legislation. It is a the removal of remissions—the automatic matter of how it is interpreted. reduction in prison sentences—from the Mr Beanland: Why did the Government system. Parole, taken in conjunction with decide to prosecute him and not Mr Baker in remissions, meant that prisoners were doing the second case? one-quarter or one-third of their time. Mr HOBBS: As the member for Mr Beattie: That's not true. You do half Toowong says, it was quite clearly a political of your sentence unless the judge directs or decision. Directions are given—— recommends otherwise. That is the parole An Opposition member: It was a test condition, and you ought to know that. case. Mr CONNOR: No, that is not true. Mr HOBBS: That is a very good point. Mr Beattie: It is true. Mr Elder: We don't determine that. Mr CONNOR: Under the system that the Mr HOBBS: The Minister for Health is Government has presided over for five years, present. I will put the challenge to him. Will he parole is half of the remainder of the sentence assist Mr Castorina to pay his legal fees? Will after remissions are taken off. The member he assist Mr Castorina by asking Cabinet for should check the rules. He is wrong. 15 June 1995 12656 Legislative Assembly

As I was saying, it took almost five years said, the parole system allowed criminals before the Government finally reacted and, in back into society well before they had effect, removed those automatic remissions served their terms." but only after a series of criticisms by the That is what the judiciary is saying about the public, by victims of crime—especially by Government's legislation. That leads me to the victims of those particular criminals who particular provision of the Criminal Code that received early release—the police and the takes away the right to trial by jury. Again, this judiciary. We then saw the security of prisons demonstrates the penny-pinching attitude of finally collapse to the stage at which we saw the Goss Government. Because of the the Hogan's Heroes style of armed robbery on Government's failures in the law and order the Gold Coast, where two prison inmates area, it is prepared to sacrifice one of the went out for a morning, committed an armed fundamental rights of the public. The Gold robbery of a TAB and were back in time for Coast Bulletin editorial that I mentioned earlier, rollcall in the afternoon. stated in relation to the Goss Government's We then had the Sergeant Shultz of the penny-pinching attitude to law and order— prison system, Glen Milliner, who was busy "Justice Bruce McPherson expressed drinking in the bar while a prison was burning astonishment at what he called down. We then saw double-strand razor wire Government penny pinching at jury trials. being stretched around the prisons—the His observations that jurors at a corruption Government finally reacting to what was trial might have been pressured into obviously a totally unacceptable situation. reaching a verdict because of a Soon after being returned to power, the Goss requirement they clear out their hotel Government enacted what it called the new rooms to save the government paying enlightened Penalties and Sentences Act, another day's accommodation . . . " under which, as punishment, imprisonment would be the last resort. The Goss The Goss Government then tried to confuse Government then tried to focus the blame for the issue of crime rates. Year after year, on a the soft sentencing of criminals on the regular basis, crime rates, especially for judiciary. It was not long before the judiciary hit burglary, soared. Initially, the Government back, when a number of eminent judges blamed what it called the fraudulent figures of complained bitterly that it was not their fault. the previous Government. However, we were then able to compare the Goss Government's For instance, only as recently as May this figures with the Goss Government's previous year, Judge Hall said— figures—apples with apples. What did that "You wonder why I impose comparison show? The same dramatic imprisonment. What's the term used— increases! Whose figures are not correct? I am turnstiles or baton doors? Revolving comparing the Goss Government's figures with doors. That's right." the Goss Government's figures. At one stage, That is how Judge Hall summed up our prison the Government even tried to argue that the system. Going back a little further, in February increase arose because more people were last year the editorial of the Gold Coast prepared to report crimes. That argument was Bulletin stated— blown out of the water when the Chairman of Suncorp, Graeme Tucker, in Suncorp's annual "Justice Tom Shepherdson made it report for last year, made a few startling quite clear yesterday the judiciary was revelations. The report stated— very much aware of the public criticism of what is often described as a soft "The claims experience in home approach by the courts to sentencing." insurance deteriorated for the year under review due mainly to the rising number Further, it stated— and cost of burglary and theft claims. "The Supreme Court judge has said In 1993-94, Suncorp paid close to the public should blame politicians for light $17 million in burglary claims, an increase sentences." of more than 50% on the previous Mr Nunn: Tell us what Shepherdson financial year. Since 1989-90 the cost of said. I challenge you. burglary and theft claims has increased by Mr CONNOR: The honourable member more than 130% and now represent is in Government; he should cop it. nearly 44% of the cost of claims incurred in the home insurance portfolio. As The article stated— Suncorp insures one in three Queensland "Justice Jim Thomas questioned the homes, we are becoming increasingly deterrent value of sentences when, he concerned about these rising costs, both Legislative Assembly 12657 15 June 1995

to the community and to insurers from this person can use to make an arrest states that type of crime." force as being reasonable force against force Neither I nor the Opposition said that; that was without any provisos, yet the very next clause a comment by the head of the Government's states that, if the person escapes from that financial institution and insurance arrest, force cannot be used that is "likely to company—Suncorp. The report went on to cause death or grievous bodily harm". On the state— one hand, people can use whatever reasonable force is required to apprehend the "This year we introduced minimum offender. On the other hand, if he escapes security requirements for new customers and is tried to be recaptured, only reasonable in certain areas"— force can be used up to the stage of possibly and that has never had to happen in causing grievous bodily harm. What level of Queensland before— force can the police use? The Government should put itself in the position of the police. "predominantly on the Gold Coast and for What level of force are they supposed to use? some southern suburbs of Brisbane." As I mentioned earlier, we have also seen So we are talking about Mr Szczerbanik's the penny-pinching move with respect to trial electorate, mine and that of the member for by jury. That change takes away what most Mansfield. Australians would believe is a basic right to be It became extremely difficult for the judged by their peers. For many years, it has Government to maintain the argument that been the option of an offender to waive his or the breakdown of law and order was simply an her rights in relation to a jury trial. It has always Opposition and media beat-up. Now, with the been at the offender's discretion whether he or Goss Government staring defeat in the face in she will waive the right to a jury trial. However, the run-up to the 1995 election, we see a this legislation states that "the Court may mass scramble to reverse the perception of its decide to charge summarily". I might add that disastrous performance on law and order. We magistrates have the power to imprison also see draft after draft of this absolutely people for up to two years. It will not be the phoney Criminal Code. discretion of the accused to decide whether he This legislation would probably be best or she wishes to waive the right to a jury trial; described as legislation that will never be. I that will be at the discretion of the court. These make the prediction today that this legislation are basic rights that millions of Australians in its present form will never be enacted, have fought and died for over the past couple because whoever wins the next election will of centuries. not enact it. I make a second prediction that, The Encyclopedia Britannica contains no matter when Mr Goss calls the election, this some very interesting comments on the history piece of legislation will not be enacted before of the jury system. I will quote a few relevant we go to the polls. I make a third prediction sections that the Minister may like to consider that, if the unfortunate circumstance arises before he allows this basic infringement of that the Goss Government does win a third human rights to proceed. It states— term, the Minister for Justice and Attorney- "The jury's origin is lost in the past. It General—and that will not be Mr Wells—very may have been indigenous to England or soon after the election will conduct a compete may have been brought there by the review of the proposed legislation and make Norman invaders in 1066." wholesale changes or probably drop the Bill altogether. Mr Wells is hell bent on undermining a British institution that goes back over 900 years. It This legislation's pedigree is that of a goes on to say— mongrel dog. Its mother was a pit bull terrier and its father was a toy poodle. In certain "By the 15th Century . . . jury trial . . . provisions within the legislation honourable became the established form of trial for members can actually see where the original both criminal and civil cases at common legislation has been beefed up. Whereas the law." previous legislation was drafted in a very soft Further, it states— way, in places within the new Code we see "The French revolution brought it as examples of a politically desperate arm of the a symbol of popular Government to the Labor Party trying to toughen it up. One European continent. First to France, itself, clause goes in one direction and a then through Napoleon to the Rhineland, subsequent clause tries to toughen it up. For later to Belgium, most of the remaining instance, a clause dealing with the force that a German states, Austria, Hungary, Russia, 15 June 1995 12658 Legislative Assembly

Italy, Switzerland, Holland and ensuring that the rigidity of the general Luxembourg." rule can be shaped to justice in a The Government is prepared to grind that particular case with government by the symbol of popular government into the dirt. It spirit of the law and not by its letter." might be interesting to note what previous It states further— jurisdictions abolished the right to trial by jury. "The letter of the law confines the What jurisdictions did that in the past? The jury to the finding of facts, but the Encyclopedia Britannica states— deviations from the judge are mostly due "Germany abandoned the jury in to the jury's subtle, and not always 1924. Both the Soviet Bloc and the conscious, injecting its sense of justice Fascist states abolished it outright. Japan into a case that might go either way. This did away with it in its short lived jury courts sense of justice may be concerned with in 1993." the person of the accused, with the threat of too harsh a punishment or with the That is the history of the types of jurisdictions content of the criminal law rules. Thus, which have abolished trial by jury. Those are not my words; those are the words of the close study of the jury has revealed it as a Encyclopedia Britannica. highly sensitive institution, subtle and discerning, moved by factors far beyond Members may also like to hear what one gross sympathy for the defendant." of our close allies has to say about the jury That is what the Encyclopedia Britannica had system. Once again, the Britannica states— to say. Government members should cop it. ". . . in 1986, in Duncan versus Louisiana, So we move on and we try to encapsulate the United States Supreme Court the Goss years. The words that sum up this declared that a jury trial is a constitutional Government are "phoney", "hypocritical" and right in all criminal cases in which the "two-faced". We are now seeing the Goss penalty may exceed 6 months." Government coming to grips with its failed A Government member: That's in theories. We are seeing it reacting to a America. constituency which does not accept the path Mr CONNOR: Those views were down which the Government is guiding expressed in America, but in Queensland we Queensland. So it is that the Goss are trying to throw the right to trial by jury out Government has lost its way. It had its road the window. The Encyclopedia Britannica map and its path when it came to power in summed up the pros and cons of the jury 1989. The trouble is that the people of system as follows— Queensland no longer want to follow the Government down that path. The people of ". . . the jury provides an important civic Queensland are saying that they want to go in experience, in that it makes tolerable the another direction, and the Goss Government stringency of certain decisions. That it acts is out of step with them. as a sort of lightning rod for animosity that otherwise might centre on the more The Goss Government is looking over its permanent Judge and that the jury is a shoulder and seeing the masses falling further guarantor of integrity since it is said to be and further behind. Under the old road map more difficult to bribe twelve men than and the old route, the Goss Government is one . . . It is also argued that twelve simply lost. This is why when the Opposition heads are better than one. That the jury released new policies the Goss Government as a group has wisdom and strength spent one or two days abusing them and then beyond that of its individual members. it stole them. The Government adopted those That it makes up in common sense and policies for itself. That has occurred time and experience what it lacks in training and time again. Is it any wonder that the that its very inexperience is an asset Opposition is holding its policies close to its because it secures a fresh perception of chest? Is it any wonder that the Goss each trial, of avoiding the stereotypes that Government is so desperately trying to lever may infect the judicial eye." them away from us? Apart from being called rudderless, this The Encyclopedia Britannica states further— Government can also be called directionless. ". . . the jury produces a government by We have a dishevelled ragbag of a men and not by rule of law . . . The jury's Government in its dying days trying to find its champions offer this very flexibility as its way, but with the wrong road map. This most endearing characteristic. They see legislation is the direct result of trying to go the jury as a remarkable device for somewhere with the wrong road map. That is Legislative Assembly 12659 15 June 1995 why we see a piece of legislation that is when Mr O'Regan was appointed as Chairman confusing—a mishmash of philosophies and of the CJC. Mr O'Regan has been quoted as directions without a clear philosophy saying that he has grave doubts about the supporting its design and direction. I want to present draft. He stated that enormous quote Thomas Hobbes, the author of the changes have been made to the Code since Leviathan, who when about to die said— he last had his hands on it. To me, that was a "Now I am about to take my last sign that the Code should go back to Mr voyage, a great leap into the dark." O'Regan. He was originally appointed to oversee the review, and he should have run That sums up this legislation—a great leap his eye over the final version of the proposed into the dark. Code. Mr LITTLEPROUD (Western Downs) Mr Terry O'Gorman said in a radio (5.56 p.m.): In rising to take part in the debate interview that Rob O'Regan enjoys an on the Criminal Code, I am aware that my international reputation as a person very responsibility is to represent the opinions of learned in criminal law. I heard the the community as I see them. I am aware also Attorney-General speak on the same radio that I am not learned in the law, and I do not station. He commented that, since Mr intend to debate the fine points of it. I want to O'Regan had dropped the reins, the review make this point at the outset: I sense that had been carried out by two Supreme Court average people in the community are dead judges. Mr Terry O'Gorman countered and scared that they may become caught up in a said that, although those two gentlemen are court case, because they know that the legal learned in the law, they are not skilled in system is very complex and very expensive. practising in the criminal law but in other fields Bearing that in mind, I commence to judge the of law. I thought that that was a good rebuttal wisdom of the way in which this legislation has of the case put forward by the Attorney- come forward. If average citizens become General—so much so that I still hold caught up in the complexity created by the reservations that the new Code has been new Code, resulting in very high financial costs properly scrutinised by those qualified to do for them, they will certainly not thank this so. I support the comments by my colleague House. the member for Indooroopilly—— Mention has been made of the fact that Mr Beanland: He should table that many of the new provisions of this Code have advice. not been tested in court. It may well be that some individuals in Queensland are involved Mr LITTLEPROUD: That is a good in a court case through which their legal point. My colleague suggests that, for the representatives will want to test out the law. benefit of those who have some knowledge of The only losers in such a case will be the the law, the Attorney-General should table in individuals. The legal system will eventually this House the opinions of those who changed sort itself out, but at great expense to the original draft suggested by Mr O'Regan. I individuals. It is my duty to express the valid have reservations about the new Code, concerns of average citizens about the new bearing in mind what it will mean for the Criminal Code and whether it will be better for average Queenslander, who is dead scared them. about the cost of the law. It has been conceded by some people Reference was made earlier to the Acts that some parts of the current Code may have Interpretation Act and its relationship to a become outdated because of technology and statement by the Attorney-General before the the way in which our society has changed. I second-reading debate resumed, led by my cannot concede that all the provisions of the colleague the member for Indooroopilly. I will old Code are wrong. I am not learned enough go on to that matter after dinner. to know whether or not the proposed Sitting suspended from 6 to 7.30 p.m. amendments have made the Code unusable. Mr LITTLEPROUD: Prior to the dinner I was prepared to consider that there may be recess, I was saying that I am most concerned merit in the new Code. Around last Tuesday, I that the average Queenslander will find the started to hear the comments coming from costs associated with the court system much people who have been part and parcel of the higher if the new Criminal Code being debated initial review. Terry O'Gorman was the first to tonight is passed and then found to be faulty. speak about the role that Rob O'Regan, QC, The Attorney-General tabled a statement prior played in the process. He was the original to this debate which clarified one section of Chairman of the Criminal Code Review this Code regarding euthanasia. That further Committee. The review was not complete strengthens my argument. If the Attorney- 15 June 1995 12660 Legislative Assembly

General needs to table a statement to clarify a magistrate, should have the right to ask to be clause in the Bill—as he is entitled to do under tried by a magistrate rather than a jury. I say the Acts Interpretation Act—one is left to that because a magistrate should have the wonder which other clauses in the Bill need capacity to dismiss all media comments about clarifying. the trial and to base his decision completely I have already made the point that, if on the facts and the laws of the Criminal parts of this Bill need to be tested in the Code. I notice that the Attorney-General is courts, the citizens of Queensland will be the taking note of what I am saying. ones who will pay, not to mention that it would Other members have also commented on be a field day for those who practise the law. this matter. The member for Brisbane Central The lawyers would spend plenty of time in said that this is a more efficient way of using court and they would make more and more the resources of the court and that it is saving money. People want to know why the old public money. The member for Nerang spoke Code, which has worked pretty well for a long with great compassion about the history of jury time, should be replaced by this new Code trials and how the Governments of the world which has been the brunt of much criticism, that have eliminated the jury system and especially when one considers the fact that reverted to magistrates are in fact regimes that the Attorney-General has had to table a have trodden over the civil rights of their statement of clarification on the Code before citizens. The members who are learned in the the debate has even finished. law can give that statement consideration. I also wish to mention the matter of trial Nevertheless, I am putting forward a proposal by jury. There are members more learned in about which I feel very deeply. the law than I am who have commented Ron McConnell of Mac's Mufflers is a man about this, but I want to talk about the who was mentioned in the Fitzgerald inquiry. experiences of the late eighties and early He put enormous amounts of money into nineties when people of public stature came bringing top-line cricketers into Queensland to before the courts of Queensland. Some of help this State boost its cricketing chances, those people were members of this Parliament and a lot of the seeding money that he has and some were businessmen. provided has paid off in the long run, even though most of the fellows who played for Mr Barton: All yours. Queensland were home-grown blokes. This Mr LITTLEPROUD: The member man was mentioned in the Fitzgerald inquiry should not start throwing dirt, because I can and subsequently slandered in the papers and throw it back. This is a serious matter. At that the press. When that man finally got his day in time, the media had a field day at the court, his case was thrown out because there expense of public figures. If a person who was was no substance to the allegations made not in the public eye was brought before the against him. However, in the interim, the poor courts, things were not too bad, but if a person bloke suffered dreadfully. His case is a good had a certain standing in the community and example of how people can suffer badly he was brought before the courts to be tried because of bias or comments being made in by a jury, that was a different matter. I believe the press before court trials. I notice that the that, no matter how carefully a jury was Attorney-General is taking that comment on selected, the jury members could not be board. It is something that I have felt strongly impartial because it would have been about for a long time. impossible for them to dismiss the media I would also like to talk about an reports of that time. amendment that was made to the Criminal During this debate, the argument as to Code some time back by this Government whether a magistrate should determine which changed the law relating to whether a case is to be heard by a magistrate homosexuality. I do not want to dwell on this or a jury has gone backwards and forwards. I issue, but it is a good illustration of the point have an idea that is a little different from both that I am trying to make. I believe that, of those suggestions. I felt then, and I still feel whichever party is in power, we need a now—and I ask the Attorney-General to process in Government to enable us to judge consider this—that if a person of public stature the validity of issues in an overall context. It finds himself before the courts for an offence was quite possible for those people who that is serious enough to warrant going before believed that there was a need to change the a jury but that person has doubts as to the Criminal Code on matters relating to impartiality of any selected jury owing to homosexuality to put up a case that looked statements made in the media either during or pretty good. Decisions have also been made prior to the trial, the accused person, not the by this Government on other matters such as Legislative Assembly 12661 15 June 1995 the property rights of de facto couples and the this country are the homes of families in which rights of citizens who belong to minority the children are adopted. In addition, in many groups. I believe that the members of this cases, children who are adopted out end up Parliament have to take a broad view rather getting a better chance in life than they would than just channel their thoughts towards the have had if they had stayed with their natural legalities or the pros and cons of the very mother. It is a difficult choice to make. In the confined views of minority groups. short term, the Government can think about This Government and previous the rights of the mother. However, with a view Governments have passed some laws in the to the longer term, we have to try to break that belief that they had to do something to ensure cycle. the rights of individuals who belong to a Mrs Edmond interjected. minority group, but the net result of those laws Mr LITTLEPROUD: I do not have time has been that the majority have lost out. Most to keep discussing this issue. I think I have honourable members are parents and we made my point. have to make all sorts of decisions. I am reminded of the old saying, "You have to be Mrs Edmond: This is the same cruel to be kind". Sometimes we have to make argument your people used for taking decisions which seem unjust at the time but Aboriginal babies away from their mothers. which lead to good overall results in the long Mr LITTLEPROUD: I think that was term. We should think very carefully before we done before the 32 years that the National amend any laws or enact legislation in this Party was in Government. This Government is place. We should first consider the effect that of the mind-set that absolutely everything it will have on the whole of society. As I say, happened during the last 32 years. I think the changes have been made to legislation with member will find that what she is talking about the intention of overcoming supposed happened more than 32 years ago. injustices towards minorities, yet the overall Mrs Edmond interjected. effect has been that the majority of society has lost out. Mr LITTLEPROUD: When we debate Mr Campbell: But how has the majority legislation in this House, we must take into lost out by recognising homosexuality? I just account the overall impact that it will have on can't follow that. society rather than focus on individual issues. Mr LITTLEPROUD: I take the Government members interjected. interjection from the honourable member for Mr LITTLEPROUD: I would like a bit of Bundaberg because he is making it quite protection, Mr Deputy Speaker. sincerely. That is only one example. This The next issue that I want to raise is a bit week, the Courier-Mail published an article that more parochial. I refer to policing in Roma. talked about the level of homelessness and The member for Tablelands talked about what poverty in Queensland. The point was made in used to be called "staffing establishment" and that article that two out of every three single- is now referred to as something else. The parent families live in poverty. I know that that problem is that anybody arrested in places does not correspond exactly to homosexuality, such as Atherton or Ravenshoe has to be but the argument is along the same lines. taken to Mareeba to be locked up. A Government member interjected. Roma should have a police staff of 17 in Mr LITTLEPROUD: The honourable order to maintain a 24-hour station. At member should let me finish. We know that present, there are about eight officers at that the children of people born into poor economic station. Two men are rostered on any one circumstances invariably find themselves in the shift. At night time, often only one person is same situation during their adult life. The rostered on. Usually, at about 7 o'clock at same thing applies to the Government's night, people start to muster for the evening's policies regarding adoption. There is an entertainment and it is then necessary for the undeniable stance taken by this Government police to have a presence in town. There are that it would rather see children stay with their seven or eight hotels in town and a couple of natural mothers. The statistics quoted in that clubs. The police do the rounds. They pat a article in the Courier-Mail show that when few fellows on the shoulder and generally those natural mothers keep their make people aware of their presence. If an children—and I admire the compassion of arrest is made and someone is put in the lock- those women who want to keep their up—and this could even be a person brought children—they in fact continue the cycle of to Roma from elsewhere—and that person is poverty. In contrast, the most stable homes in remanded in custody until court the next day, 15 June 1995 12662 Legislative Assembly the Police Service in Roma then loses all of its Services, and the reality is that they are never powers. Because of his duty of care, the police seen again. The Department of Family officer on duty cannot leave the station. He Services, with its current level of administration has to be there to look after the person in the and staffing, is negligent. It is not carrying out watch-house, which is part and parcel of the its duties in line with the orders made by the police station. The citizens of Roma have a Children's Court. legitimate complaint that the effectiveness of The Family Services Minister is not in the their police station is lost when there are Chamber, but no doubt she will read Hansard insufficient staff to man the station 24 hours a or the Attorney-General will report my day and attend to any incidents that might comments to her. There is a serious defect not occur. in the Children's Court and the way in which it This problem is compounded by the fact operates but in the way the orders of the court that there are quite a number of one-man are carried out by the Department of Family stations in small towns of 70 to 150 people Services. Recently, a local sergeant rang me near Roma and its surrounding districts. These and said that it was not fair that he should individual police officers have a big role to have to put up with a young bloke who was play. It is not easy, and often they call on their playing up and who was supposed to be in the wives to help them out. Because the Roma care and control of the Department of Family Police Station is so short-staffed, fellows from Services. The sergeant warned that unless the the one-man stations are being called into young bloke was brought under control, he Roma to make up staffing on the various would end up in serious trouble. It is sad to shifts. Although a place such as Wallumbilla relate that the young fellow did get into serious has only a small population, the locals are just trouble when he turned 18 and is now in a as entitled to law and order as are the people Corrective Services institution. If the in any town. However, they are left without a Department of Family Services had complied policeman while he does his shift in Roma. with the order of the Children's Court, that may not have happened. Mr Vaughan: Aren't you getting off the subject? Mr ELLIOTT (Cunningham) (7.46 p.m.): In rising to take part in the debate this Mr LITTLEPROUD: No. I am talking evening, there are a couple of comments I about the Criminal Code which these police would like to make on the broad scope of the officers have to enforce, and that is a debate so far. I think this debate and the legitimate argument. debate on the Matter of Special Public Mr Robertson interjected. Importance earlier this week are typical Mr LITTLEPROUD: That was a good examples of a Government that is running try, but not nearly as good as the effort by the scared and is not really prepared to stand up here and back its judgment and talk about its member for Whitsunday who was talking achievements. When I think back over the about the Boer War. years we were in Government, and consider Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr the run-ups to the various campaigns, it was Palaszczuk): Order! The Chair will rule on very obvious if one compared the 1989 whether honourable members are straying campaign with the 1986 or 1983 campaigns, from the contents of the Bill. Up to now the that there was this tremendous propensity to debate has been very wide-ranging and the look back into the past and talk about how Chair has been very tolerant. The member for terrible the ALP may have been or about its Western Downs may continue. shortcomings—and there were plenty of Mr LITTLEPROUD: Juveniles often them—rather than standing up and talking appear before the Children's Court, which has about the achievements during that particular to take notice of the Criminal Code. I point that three years in office. As I listened to the out for the benefit of honourable members debate I was quite amazed at some of the who query the relevance of my comments. comments that were made. Outside the major city areas, the Children's Mr Fenlon: You don't want to hear Court very often hands down a court order that about our achievements. a juvenile offender will come under the care Mr ELLIOTT: No. Government and control of the Department of Family members have not been talking about this Services. There are many instances in which Government's achievements. The member for the offenders then go into the more remote Brisbane Central, who is an intelligent and parts of Queensland, well away from the well-educated person, should know better than presence of the Department of Family to stand in this House and carry on with a Legislative Assembly 12663 15 June 1995 diatribe the likes of which I have never before he hit his head on the footpath and was heard him utter in this House. knocked unconscious. He was then taken to Mrs Edmond: He was responding to hospital and was held there for observation. your leader's debate. He was released the next day, but by 31 December he was back in hospital. He was Mr ELLIOTT: He was responding to subsequently declared brain dead by the nothing; he had nothing to talk about. He was hospital authorities. basically trying to curry favour with the leadership of the ALP up on the hill. He spoke He and his relatives had given consent the way he did because Uncle Tom, who that in these circumstances his heart would be sometimes bothers to sit on the front bench, donated to be used in a transplant. That duly has been running around the place making a took place. He was kept alive on a life support lot of noise. He can see that things are not system until the heart transplant occurred. going so well. He is even putting press When the Crown took the accused to court the releases out in the bush saying, "Tell the kids situation arose in which the defence lawyer about all the corruption." Honestly, is that not argued that his client did not in fact kill the the lowest form of political life, to try to shove deceased and was not guilty of manslaughter down the necks of the children of this State because the doctor had killed him by removing what a dreadful lot of people made up the his heart. There was a pulse and the machine former Government? had not been turned off until the deceased's heart was removed, and therefore the Mr Springborg: It's like Mein Kampf accused could not be found guilty of and 1984, isn't it? manslaughter. As I recall, the case was thrown Mr ELLIOTT: Exactly, it is very much out and the accused released. like Mein Kampf. I suggest to the Attorney-General, and I I hope Government members are proud am not trying to be half smart or anything else, of themselves, because when they look back that this sort of case was not thought of when at the results of the coming election, I suggest this Bill was being drafted. I suggest that there that quite a few of them who were in this will be many similar cases because the House will regret that they did not make more Attorney-General has not defined "death" of the opportunities they had to talk positively sufficiently well to allow us to know exactly about the things that they felt they had what we are talking about as far as the law is achieved. It is a very strong indication of how concerned. It is a grey area. It is not defined badly the Government has gone when its well enough in the Bill, which is a considerable members are not prepared to stand here and deficiency. I think it is very important that the do that. Attorney-General go away, have a look at that definition, and talk to his advisers and to Mr First of all, I would like to touch on an area Rob O'Regan, QC, to discover just exactly which I believe has been overlooked by the what he has to say about it. I would be Attorney-General and I hope that he listens interested to hear what he has to say. I was with interest. In respect of the definition of not a member of that review committee, and I personal offences, it is quite clear that the have not had time to go back through his definitions of "murder" and "kill" are good report. I am interested because I followed the ones. As far as I can see, they are reasonable case at the time and it was raised with me and sensible definitions. However, there is no again in the last few days. That is why I am definition of "death". In this day and age, with raising it here tonight. To me is a glaring hole the technology that is available to the medical through which a 10-tonne truck could be profession and to hospitals to prolong life, if driven. It may well be embarrassing for the "death" is not defined we will face an ever- State and whoever may be in power at the increasing number of problems. time that a similar case arises that that term is I want to relate the details of a case that not sufficiently well defined to provide is probably well known to those members who protection. Tonight, with all sincerity I ask that live in the north, particularly the far north. I do the Attorney go away, have a look at it, take not want to embarrass the families by using some advice on it and report back to the any names, but this was a very well-publicised Parliament as to whether his advisers see a case of person being charged of problem with it. If they do not see a difficulty, manslaughter and taken to court. The incident how do they see that problem being overcome started with a brawl in a pub on Christmas and by which provision in this legislation would Eve. Those involved went outside the pub and such a problem be handled without it causing finished the brawl in the street. The fellow who any grief? That is the first point I wanted to was charged knocked the other person down, raise. 15 June 1995 12664 Legislative Assembly

The second matter I would like to raise is stealing. It is the same as having money in the area of public order and authority disappear. Regardless of whether we are offences. A lot of people will probably pooh- talking about someone who takes one or two pooh this statement, but I find it interesting cleanskins, sneaks them into his own herd and because when one looks at the offence of brands them, it is still stealing, it is dishonesty, exciting disaffection against the sovereign, for it is illegal and should be stamped out. Every argument's sake, if Government members last bit of effort should be put into stamping it look at what has been happening over a large out. number of years now, basically their Federal There is no difference between cattle counterparts have been doing precisely that. duffing and stealing money. What is the That is exactly what Keating and his difference between going out and, for Government have been doing. They have argument's sake, stealing two or three head gradually and stealthily worked their way from some old pensioner who is on his last through a lot of our institutions. For instance, legs financially and the louts who rob from old they have removed the Queen from our pensioners and snatch old ladies' handbags? currency. In a lot of cases we have seen the We see reports of such cases more and more, various changes—— particularly south of the river. We see such Mr T. B. Sullivan: Aren't you proud the cases reported in the Courier-Mail with Australian face is on there? monotonous regularity. There is no difference Mr ELLIOTT: My goodness, here he is! between those people and the person who I thought the honourable member had gone comes in and takes a few head of cattle from home. someone who can ill afford to lose them. Unfortunately, cattle duffing has had a Mr Springborg: He's moving. romantic tag attached to it. As a member who Mr ELLIOTT: He is actually moving and represents an electorate that contains a he talks. reasonable area of country where people are Mr T. B. Sullivan: Aren't you proud of trying to make a living under very difficult their Australian faces, like the rest of us? circumstances, I go on the record as saying that the people in my electorate are not Mr ELLIOTT: I have been very amused by the attitude of the Government, interested to observe the stealthy way the the approach that it has taken or the way in whole campaign has been conducted. One which it has handled the crime of cattle hundred years or so ago, Mr Keating would duffing. probably have been tried for treason, but obviously we do not live in those times so As to the Stock Squad—I challenge the perhaps it is not likely to happen. I see that Government to go on the record before the the Attorney-General has a wry smile on his election and tell us what it will do about putting face. I think it is important for us to reflect on together a reasonable group of people who the way in which this campaign has been have the experience necessary to handle conducted because I suggest that that will be stock stealing in order to ensure that the Stock the way in which the Federal Labor Squad is capable of handling those offences. Government will continue to attack the various Mr Ardill: The Attorney-General will do traditions of the whole Westminster system of that. Government as we know it, and will not be Mr ELLIOTT: It is under this Criminal happy until it has undermined and destroyed Code. everything that it stands for, including the monarchy. To my way of thinking this has Mr Ardill: Section 151. been a very concentrated campaign by the Mr ELLIOTT: I know that, but if one Keating Government to do just that. looks at the current Criminal Code one sees I now want to touch on the subject of that stock stealing has its own separate cattle duffing. People who do not live in the section, which defines and explains the bush or who do not own any cattle may watch offence. Robbery Under Arms or some other famous Mr Vaughan: How effective was it? film and think that there is something romantic Mr ELLIOTT: It was certainly quite about cattle duffing. Believe me, Mr Deputy effective at times and not as effective at Speaker, if you had lived in the bush and had others. someone come along with a truck, put together a temporary set of yards and run Mr Vaughan: You're complaining about cattle up into a truck and disappear into the cattle duffing, which takes place under the old night, you, too, would regard cattle duffing as Criminal Code. Legislative Assembly 12665 15 June 1995

Mr ELLIOTT: I know that, but this in the Chamber yesterday, I suppose I must legislation removes that section from the give the Attorney-General the benefit of the Criminal Code and mentions that offence only doubt and say that perhaps he is not really in passing, as though it is not important. The trying to introduce euthanasia by stealth. In legislation that is before the House does not my research into this topic, I came across place the same emphasis on cattle duffing as plenty of comments about the provision which the current Criminal Code. On behalf of my are less than complimentary and, in fact, are constituents—— highly critical, culminating in the remarks Mr Wells: But we have increased the attributed to the former Chairman of the CJC, penalty for it. Mr Rob O'Regan, who chaired the original review of the Code soon after this Government Mr ELLIOTT: That is good. I am glad to came to power. Nevertheless, there is a hear that. That is at least something. lingering doubt, and a widespread concern in Mr Beanland: That's the maximum respect of clause 82. penalty. Because the revised Criminal Code is so Mr ELLIOTT: Yes, as the shadow vastly different from the current Criminal Code, Attorney-General rightly says, that is the there is no doubt that, clause by clause, it will maximum penalty. When cattle duffers come be tested in the courts. I fear that we will see before the courts, we would like to see them the sad circumstances of many deaths dealt with in a way that will strike fear into the dragged through the courts as clause 82 is hearts of other people who may be about to tested, despite the Attorney's disclaimer. The embark upon similar crimes. Attorney says that clause 82 is not designed I believe that the Government has to legalise euthanasia, but rather that the introduced this legislation because, in the provision of palliative care will be protected. dying stages of its last-ditch effort, it felt a The Attorney is quoted as saying— need to communicate to the public that it is "Palliative care is the provision of trying to do something about law and order. pain relief in circumstances where, if the Every day when Government members pick person dies, that death was not intended. up the newspaper, the problem stares them in It is a distinction between the intentional the face: more and more crime, more and and non-intentional taking of human life." more break and enters, and more and more break-ins when the residents are present. The proposed section 82 of the revised There used to be a saying, "A man's home is Criminal Code provides— his castle." "(1) A person is not criminally Mr Santoro: Not any more. responsible for performing or providing, in good faith and with reasonable care and Mr ELLIOTT: Not any more, as the skill, a surgical operation on, or medical member for Clayfield said. Under this treatment of— Government, that concept has been undermined and it is most important that we (a) a person for the patient's return to it. benefit; or Mr Santoro: Our homes are our prisons, (b) an unborn child to preserve the aren't they? mother's life; Mr ELLIOTT: They are indeed. if performing the operation or providing the medical treatment is reasonable, Mrs GAMIN (Burleigh) (8.05 p.m.): I am having regard to the patient's state at the pleased to join the debate on the new Criminal time and all the circumstances. Code. Others will speak, or have spoken, on a wide range of problems associated with this (2) Surgical or medical treatment to legislation. There are immense shortcomings sterilise a patient, performed with the in the new Criminal Code and the Attorney- patient's consent, is taken to be for the General could hardly have been pleased to patient's benefit. read or follow the criticisms that have been (3) In this section— expressed by those trained in the law. 'medical treatment' includes pain relief. Because there are a great many speakers in this debate, I have chosen to confine my 'providing medical treatment' includes remarks to clause 82, which is one of great withdrawing medical treatment." concern to many people. It is a clause which Proposed section 82 should be compared with obviously needs to be amended to allay those the present section 282 of the Criminal Code concerns. In view of the document circulated 1899— 15 June 1995 12666 Legislative Assembly

"A person is not criminally afraid of prolonged suffering, and it is responsible for performing in good faith heartbreaking to see others suffer. No and with reasonable care and skill a patient and no doctor is under any surgical operation upon any person for obligation to prolong life unnecessarily. the patient's benefit, or upon an unborn Indeed, it is the patient, not the doctor, child for the preservation of the mother's who should decide whether painful, life, if the performance of the operation is expensive or complicated means should reasonable, having regard to the patient's be used to prolong the life of a dying state at the time and to all circumstances person. The patient is free not to receive of the case." or accept such treatments. It is also There does seem to be a large body of legitimate for a doctor to use any and legal and medical, church and community every approved drug to take away the opinion that the proposed section 82 goes pain and suffering of a dying person. beyond restating the present law, in particular Those who argue for euthanasia in respect of the administration of drugs—pain usually do not give modern medicine the killing drugs—with the intention of bringing credit for what it has achieved in this field. about death. There is real concern in the The science of palliative care has made community that the interpretation will be made remarkable progress. of the intention of shortening life—so as to Euthanasia goes beyond not ease pain or bring a miserable existence to an prolonging life. It is direct and intentional end. killing. It places a most dangerous power There is now an ongoing debate in this in the hands of human beings. country on the subject of euthanasia, Most doctors are opposed to especially since the recent Northern Territory euthanasia. Their profession is one of legislation. The Australian Medical Association saving life, not extinguishing it, and continues with its opposition to the Northern legalising euthanasia would place Territory's legislation. Outgoing President, Dr intolerable pressures on them." Brendan Nelson, says that any euthanasia law will be open to abuse and error. He says that it Each one of us is responsible for his or is a devaluation in the currency of human life. her own actions. No-one is obliged to take Dr Nelson argues that death with dignity extraordinary means to prolong life. should be facilitated by more resources being Extraordinary means would involve grave devoted to palliative care, not by a patient burdens for oneself or another. We value life, asking to be killed. but we should not be afraid of death. Of course we are all afraid of death—either I will now quote some excerpts from a openly afraid or secretly afraid. We are all letter sent by the Australian Catholic Bishops afraid of the unknown; there are no absolute Conference, read in churches on Sunday, 14 answers as we face the process of dying. May this year. In doing so, I am not trying to push one church's view more than another, Not all dying persons are given the clear but I thought that this was particularly well choice of deciding whether to continue to phrased. It is short, clear and succinct. There prolong life or to refuse to take extraordinary is no doubt or ambiguity as to the message. measures. Often those decisions fall back on The letter states— sons or daughters or other family members or perhaps, when there is no family, on other "Euthanasia is when a doctor not an persons. However, intervening directly to help illness, kills the patient. people to die, no matter how humane the If we accept euthanasia, we give a motive, is a very wrong principle and one that doctor a licence to kill. we cannot allow in legislation. I am reminded There are big steps and there are of an old doctor's rhyme. I remember that it little steps. The biggest step is the leap was quoted to my mother as my 84-year-old from saying 'No one may kill' to saying terminally ill grandfather was dying. He did not 'Some one may kill'. The little step is from want any more treatment to prolong a life that saying that 'someone may kill this person' was drawing to a close. The doctor's words to saying that 'someone may also kill that went something like this— person'. "Thou shall not kill, nor shall thou Euthanasia puts at risk all those strive officiously to keep alive." people who others think would be better That was nearly 40 years ago before we had off dead. The debate over euthanasia is a ever heard of palliative care. My grandfather highly emotional one, for everyone is died at home. He was kept as pain free and Legislative Assembly 12667 15 June 1995 as comfortable as possible, but without decision to kill? We cannot allow legalised officious and extraordinary methods to prolong killing in this State or in this country. his life. He died with dignity. Proposed section 82 of the revised The revised Queensland Criminal Code Criminal Code should be withdrawn, and the opens up many concerns within the existing section 282 retained—at least for the community. As well as what has occurred time being until all the ramifications of the already in the Northern Territory, similar revised clause can be explored. The Northern legislation has been foreshadowed in other Territory should repeal its legislation titled "The Australian Parliaments. It is reported that New rights of the terminally ill". Brisbane's Anglican South Wales is considering such legislation. In Archbishop Hollingworth describes it as having the Australian Capital Territory, an crossed what is an exceedingly dangerous independent MLA is proposing to introduce a threshold. Euthanasia Bill. Opponents of this Bill have The Victorian and South Australian stated— Parliaments have conducted parliamentary "We strongly support the right of any inquiries into the law and medical practice terminally ill person to die with as much relating to care for the dying. Although they dignity and as little suffering as possible. found that there were serious deficiencies in A patient should have the right to allow the palliative care system, both rejected his or her life to end naturally and without euthanasia as an option. pain. Equally, if a person faced with a In conclusion, I say that much more terminal condition, does not want medical attention and support should be given to intervention, he or she should be allowed palliative care systems, and hospices for the to refuse it. terminally ill and dying should be supported We will totally oppose any legislation and encouraged. Much more attention should which might require a doctor or nurse to be given to the treatment of terminally ill public deliberately end a patient's life. Such a patients, and palliative care training should be requirement would put medical introduced into all public and teaching practitioners in an impossible position. hospitals. I can only repeat that section 82 of The deliberate termination of the life of a the revised Criminal Code has given cause for patient is unethical and immoral, and great alarm to lawyers, church leaders, and must remain illegal." others. Although the Attorney-General has The law is a very blunt instrument, and tried to allay the fear that he is trying to the adversarial system lacks subtlety in dealing introduce euthanasia by stealth into with complex moral issues. It is too big a step Queensland, he should not be legislating on for the right of one citizen to kill another to be this issue. He should take heed of this enshrined in law. Who should be allowed to widespread alarm, he should listen to those decide that a person's death should be hurried who are concerned and he should withdraw up? Who should be allowed to intervene and clause 82 today. The Attorney-General should decide that a person's life is no longer substitute clause 82 with section 282 of the necessary, no longer has any validity and that existing Criminal Code until a more satisfactory a person is no longer wanted? What of the and less ambiguous wording can be devised risks of a patient being persuaded into and Queensland is not bracketed with the euthanasia by medical personnel or by family Northern Territory as a State that allows and members—and yes indeed, that could encourages euthanasia by legalising a licence certainly happen—with the patient left in to kill. ignorance of the alternatives in terms of Dr WATSON (Moggill) (8.17 p.m.): I am palliative care? pleased to enter the debate on the proposed We no longer have capital punishment in revision of the Criminal Code of Queensland. this country. We no longer kill criminals who Although most of us would support a have committed even the most horrific crimes. reconsideration of Sir Samuel Griffith's Code, I But who is going to say to someone whose cannot help thinking what a wasted only crime is to become feeble, to be unable opportunity this has been. to enjoy a quality of life, or to become The Government decided to rewrite the terminally ill, "You do not know what is going Criminal Code and, to that end, a number of on around you. You do not deserve to live. years ago requested the Law Reform You would be better off dead", and then Commission to do so. In reality, with the action is taken to kill that person? Who is rewriting of the Criminal Code the Government going to make the decision to push someone has done nothing more than update the over the edge? Who is going to make the Criminal Code into plain English. Certainly, a 15 June 1995 12668 Legislative Assembly few more offences have been added here and people who were killed. This peaceful remedy there in the new Criminal Code; it has dropped appeased the victim or the victim's survivors, out a few provisions of the old Criminal Code deterred offences and avoided the terrible loss here and there; and some of the penalties caused by blood feuds or warfare. Apparently, have been changed—in particular, a number according to historical records, violence was of maximum penalties have been increased. rarely necessary to force compliance with Of course, as the member for Indooroopilly monetary sanctions. If the accused person and shadow Attorney-General has pointed was unable to pay, he was placed in slavery. If out, the minimum penalties remain low. he failed to appear to answer a charge or Unfortunately, the same mind-set has refused to pay, he was an outlaw and the been used in designing this Code as has been accuser had a legal right under the Anglo- used in designing the original Code and other Saxon common law to take his life. criminal codes throughout Australia and the Today, that may of course seem rather rest of the world. The Code continues to give a barbaric, but it worked because a social monopoly to the State in order to control crime consensus prevailed on the law and the fines. and to punish offenders. The Government's The criminal's kindred also had a duty mind-set occurs at a time that citizens are imposed by custom to make amends for the turning to the private provision of security and offences of its members, which is another law enforcement. avenue for the compensation of the victims of The fact of the matter is that this rewrite of those crimes. Before the tenth century, history the Criminal Code continues to tilt the legal tells us that the intervention by powerful system towards criminal punishment when, in individuals in ordinary legal disputes was, in fact, we should perhaps reconsider the issue fact, rare. However, if a particularly powerful from the point of view of the plaintiff or, shall I offender was successful in resisting tribal say, victim restitution. In rewriting the Criminal justice, a victim could call upon an elder and Code, it is extremely unfortunate that the ultimately an earl or a king for enforcement. If Government has looked no further than the the offender was found guilty, the cost to the simple unproductive imprisonment of those offender would be considerably more, who commit offences. What is missing is any because not only did he have to pay the victim consideration of creative ways of restitution but also the more powerful compensating the victims of criminal offences individual, the king, who enforced the in such a way that not only provides a settlement. So the king, whose original primary punishment to those committing the crimes function was one of conducting warfare but also provides some form of restitution to against other lands, evolved as part of the those who have been the victims of crimes. justice process. His entrance was a useful mechanism for actually obtaining cash or its I think it is worth considering the historical equivalent, but this gradually led the monarch development of our criminal justice system. I to expand his role into criminal law. do so not because I wish to provide a history lesson to members but because I believe we Violations of certain custom laws began to need to be reminded of how we came to have be referred to as violations of the king's peace. our present system so that we can understand The power of the king evolved, as indicated fully our present position and the trade-offs earlier, in about the tenth century. In many and changes that have been made. cases what were previously regarded as Importantly, today's significant reliance on intentional torts instead became crimes under Governments to control crime is, in fact, a the king's peace or against the people of relatively recent phenomenon in the evolution England. A subtle difference developed. of our criminal justice system. Our legal system Whereas the spoils of tort law belonged to the is derived from English law which, in turn, was victims, the spoils of criminal law went to the derived from the Anglo-Saxon laws and the king. Consequently, the new intervention in laws of the Norman monarchs. In early Anglo- the system of justice ended up replacing the Saxon society, individuals lived in small payment of the wergilds. Criminals were kindred or tribal groups and they relied on declared to be outlaws, their property could be these groups for protection against crime and confiscated and corporal and capital for the pursuit of an offender if an offence was punishment began to be instituted. committed. The tribal groups were also The evolution of private to public justice responsible for leading a member to answer a went further after the Normans invaded and charge and for the payment of fines. The conquered England in 1066. Their system of Anglo-Saxons gradually moved from the blood fines, confiscations and corporal and capital feuds to a system of what was termed punishment was administered by royal law wergilds, or prices to be paid to the relatives of enforcement and the judicial apparatus they Legislative Assembly 12669 15 June 1995 established. In the twelfth century, King York State the Supreme Court ruled that a Henry I, generally known as the "Law Giver", victim who was attacked after seeking police issued a set of laws which decreed that there protection to no avail had no right to shall be certain offences against the king's protection. The court refused to create such a peace, namely, things such as arson, robbery, right, saying that it imposed a crushing murder, false coinage and crimes of violence. economic burden on the Government. It is These were to be deemed felonies. Later in little wonder then that citizens are turning to the twelfth century, Henry II was particularly the private sector for involvement in law innovative in replacing private decentralised enforcement. Although not stated in such law with public centralised and, one would say, direct terms, this is a recurring theme running politicised criminal law. What happened during through much of the current attitude to law this period is that the list of actions violating enforcement in Queensland. One of the the king's peace grew, the contrast between fastest growing industries in Queensland is the civil and criminal causes developed further and private security industry. the king issued more and more decrees to As far back as 1985, research by BIS- secure his monopoly over the prosecution of Shrapnel revealed that Australia's security the criminal law. This had the added business was worth at least $600m per year. advantage of leading to the generation of Today, many would believe that that figure greater revenue. has probably doubled. Since 1983, The king used the following methods to Queensland's security industry has grown on replace the private law of crime with State rule average by 13 per cent per annum and now and to induce or compel cooperation. Firstly, a registers some 4,200-odd individual security victim was declared a criminal if he obtained providers. In fact, many in the industry believe restitution from the original criminal privately that security providers far outnumber the before he brought the case before the king's State's supposed 6,300 police, with many of justice. Secondly, victims could not pursue civil them operating unchecked. Late last year, the remedies until criminal court prosecution was secretary of the Queensland Security completed. Thirdly, the rightful owner of stolen Association, Mr Bob Spreadborough, was property could not get his goods back until quoted in the Courier-Mail as saying that their after he had given evidence in a criminal business has increased dramatically by about prosecution. Fourthly, advertisers or printers 300 per cent since Labor has been in power, who posted a reward for the return of stolen mainly because of the increase in the crime property, with no questions being asked, were rate. More recently, it has been reported—and then fined. It is interesting to observe how I think this was on TV—that residents of Studio these central tenets remain as part of our Village, an estate off the Gold Coast highway, criminal justice system some 800 years later. pay Mr Geoff Crank and his offsider, James In essence, therefore, the king's—or, if Blacker, $10 per month to run the streets, honourable members like, the State's— checking more than 300 houses for thugs and monopoly on the pursuit, prosecution and to watch over property. Mr Crank hopes to punishment of criminals became complete. It expand his patrols to neighbouring Nerang is this attitude in relation to the role of the and Helensvale. State which held sway over the development So there is little doubt that private sector of criminal law in all the English-based legal law enforcement continues to expand and, systems around the world. This mind-set has according to some people, expand greatly influenced the development of Australian law, because of the fear of crime in this State. It is and of course influenced—or even a fact that in my electorate people cannot go determined—Sir Samuel Griffith's method of to a bank at Kenmore, or probably anywhere approaching his original Criminal Code. As I else in Brisbane, without passing the said at the beginning, it has also influenced obligatory security guard. At Indooroopilly the writing of the Bill currently before the Shopping Town—and I am sure that this is the House. case at every major shopping centre in south- However, it is interesting to note that, east Queensland—they have had to hire their although Governments have taken control of own security personnel to protect customers the public criminal justice system, the courts from losing their cars through car theft while have generally ruled that there is not a specific visiting and shopping at these major shopping or an actionable duty on the part of the State centres. I understand that they have been to protect individuals. This seems to be the quite successful in reducing that risk. case not only in Australia but also in other The rise in the number of private law English-based political legal systems. For enforcement agencies indicates two factors. example, I understand that in 1968 in New The first is that there is a demand for the 15 June 1995 12670 Legislative Assembly services of private law enforcement agencies also a defendant in a criminal court for the despite the fact that there exists a public law same offence, because the same act is often enforcement agency in the Queensland Police both a crime and a tort. There are, in fact, Service. The second point is that individuals distinct advantages in having more civil suits must feel that they are getting value for their directed against criminals. These include— money since the engagement of private law (1) As victims collect compensation from the enforcement agencies is a free choice on the liable defendants, the successful suits part of these individuals. While many encourage victims to sue in other cases. businesses see this now as a necessary expense of conducting business, private (2) The pay-off to the criminal is lowered and citizens are now seeing it as a necessary the crime discouraged because criminals expense to feel safe in the society in which experience a higher risk of suffering they live. financial loss. The question that needs to be addressed (3) It is easier for victims to win because only is: if private citizens are willing to pay private a preponderance of evidence is required law enforcement agencies to help combat the to prevail whereas a criminal conviction existence of crime, how else can we use requires evidence of guilt beyond a private incentives to combat the rise in reasonable doubt. criminality in our society? Most importantly, is it (4) The plaintiff can benefit financially if the possible to rearrange our Criminal Code so as defendant profits from the crime—for to encourage private participation along with example, by writing a book—because the the public participation in the criminal profits can be used to pay restitution, sanctions and enforcement of the Criminal unlike in a criminal conviction. In fact, it Code? In fact, mechanisms already exist has been reported that the son of one of whereby we are encouraging private the victims of Charles Manson and his individuals to participate in law enforcement followers won a $500,000 Federal law suit activities. Crime Stoppers is an example. So is in the United States against Charles Operation Noah, which the Queensland Police Manson in 1971 and, although he had to Service carries out once a year. Both of these wait until 1993—some 22 years—he programs recruit private citizens in the began collecting royalties due to Manson enforcement of the criminal law. So does from songs that had been recorded in Neighbourhood Watch. They are successful. 1993. Why are we not building on those successes? We already have confiscation of profits On the television screen, America's Most legislation when it comes to organised crime Wanted is a popular program, as is the and drug-related crime. Why do we not program Unsolved Mysteries. I think it was expand this concept to other areas such as Rupert Murdoch's Fox Television Network that stealing, robbery and all those property reported that, of the 717 fugitives profiled on offences included in Chapter 3 of the America's Most Wanted in early February proposed Code? 1994, 292 were captured as a direct result of While there are undoubtedly some viewer participation. In fact, it is possible that problems with private prosecutions, there are we could expand the private participation in some measures which could be investigated in the capture and prosecution of those who an attempt to integrate tort law and criminal have undertaken criminal activity. It is not law. Firstly, the law could be changed to give uncommon for Governments to post rewards, criminal courts concurrent civil jurisdiction or bounties, for information leading to where it is requested and to allow the joining conviction in celebrated or extremely difficult of civil litigation with criminal prosecution. criminal investigations. Tonight, I noticed that Then, if the defendant were convicted, even Crime Stoppers advertises a potential immediately after sentencing the same judge $1,000 win for someone who helps to solve a who presided over the criminal trial could hear crime. Why can we not consider this approach the civil suit against the defendant. Perhaps more generally? the victim should be allowed to ask for In rewriting the Criminal Code, it is compensation in a criminal trial, in the same unfortunate that the Government did not manner as would be permitted under civil law. consider how it might be possible to I understand that in France a crime victim may reintegrate into criminal proceedings what has file a civil claim for reparations against the since the twelfth century traditionally been a accused at the same time as a criminal civil proceeding or a tort suit. It is well known prosecution is brought by the public prosecutor that plaintiffs can bring tort suits in a civil court and before the same court. The advantage of against the defendant even if the accused is this is that currently victims generally have to Legislative Assembly 12671 15 June 1995 wait until the criminal prosecution is complete Mrs EDMOND (Mount Coot-tha) before they can decide to pursue a civil (8.35 p.m.): I was not intending to take part in remedy. But, by attempting a combination, we this debate. It has been a very long and fairly might be able to do both things at the same repetitive debate, but there are a couple of time. This would help victims, increase the points that I wanted to try to clarify for costs to the criminal and encourage more members relating to clause 82. I am not sure private action in the crime area. whether it has been deliberately misinterpreted Secondly, as legislators, we could permit or whether there has been a genuine more liberal use of restitution through misunderstanding of this clause, but as I have performance of in-kind services—for example, worked almost all my adult life treating patients yard mowing or house painting—as well as with cancer, I thought that I could contribute repayment through wages withheld. In order something to the debate. that there be no cost to the taxpayers, This provision of the Code is included supervision could be financed and operated because of the actions of me and other by, say, a private bonding agent. These people who have worked in that area. It is remedies may require, for example, necessary because of the actions of extremist modification of the bankruptcy laws and also organisations which have litigated against raise issues of how one garnishees wages. palliative carers in a number of countries But it seems to me that if we can modify the around the world. It is included at the request range of penalties that can be considered by and for the protection of the dedicated carers judges in sentencing to include restitution to of the terminally ill. I want to take a couple of the victims of the crime, then we will go a long moments to explain their concerns. Anyone way towards not only compensating the who has dealt with patients or family members victims but also making sure that the criminals of patients dying of cancer, of AIDS or of carry out a useful function in society. many of the other chronic and acute diseases Thirdly, we might consider allowing victims would agree with me that, contrary to the to be a party to the negotiation of settlements claims of some of those extremist right-to-life in criminal trials. If criminal and civil trials were groups, dying in agony over a lengthy period, joined, settlements in both could be losing control of one's physical being, and negotiated at the same time and, I would often one's mind, is not uplifting. It is not in think, for less expense. We are all aware that any way enlightening; it is dehumanising, it is at times criminals are permitted to plead guilty painful and it is pure torture for the soul. It is to lesser offences and, in that way, do not go also torture for the people who are watching through a trial for more serious offences. This those things occur. has advantages to the State because it lowers The use of long-term opiates, morphine the cost of law enforcement and, of course, it derivatives and analgesics for pain relief has advantages to criminals because they may—I repeat "may"—shorten the life span of receive lesser punishment. The problem is that the receiver. There is a scientific and medical the victim of the crime is left out of this debate about whether or not it does have a process. If criminal and civil trials were joined, it shortening effect on that person's life. It is very seems to me that, in the negotiation of hard to determine whether someone who is settlements, the victim would also have to be dying of other causes has had their life appropriately compensated. This would shortened by the use of pain relief or whether probably raise the cost to the criminal, but it is they would have died at that precise time if important to understand that it is the victims nothing else had happened. But in court and society in general which would be the actions in the United States and Britain, the beneficiaries of that extra cost. extreme right-to-life groups have argued that, As I said at the beginning, as we move if a life is shortened by the medical treatment towards the twenty-first century, we need a given or removed—even by half a day—then legal system to be tilted slightly more towards the carer, medical practitioner or family the plaintiff and the restitution of the victim member responsible is guilty of murder. That is instead of concentrating solely on the criminal why this clause is needed—because some punishment of the perpetrator of the crime. In extreme groups are prepared to use that this way, we could move away from a simply against the most concerned and caring people unproductive imprisonment of criminals—at in our community and against families already great cost to the State—to a system which in anguish. plays a more productive role in our society and It is only a few years ago that pain relief to one which compensates to some was doled out according to the time since the extent—and I believe in a very important previous dose of pain relief and not according way—the victims of criminal activity. to the amount of pain that a patient suffered. 15 June 1995 12672 Legislative Assembly

Around hospital wards, I constantly saw nurses phrase, that that has just opened the doors to who would say, "No, you cannot have any euthanasia? more pain relief. You have another 20 minutes Mrs EDMOND: No, I do not. I can quote to put up with it until you can have another case after case in which patients have lived for dose." We have moved past that. With many years in, as I said, a persistent modern technology, many patients are now vegetative state where they have been kept able to handle their own pain relief, using alive by nasogastric feeding and hydration in a intravenous pumps to administer pain relief as way that is totally artificial. We have to come to they need it without looking at the clock. But terms with the fact that, if we are using artificial there comes a time when they are physically means to keep people alive, perhaps we have incapable of doing that and they must rely on to make decisions which allow them to die as a carer—be it a family member, a nurse or a they would naturally. medical practitioner—to provide the pain relief needed to allow that patient to have dignity. Mr T. B. Sullivan: And that is different Carers cannot do that adequately if they must from—— consistently worry about vexatious litigation. Mrs EDMOND: It is totally different from I am not talking about giving a lethal dose taking an active step such as euthanasia. to help a suffering person on their way. That is As I said, many cases have been listed euthanasia, and we are not discussing that where families have been forced to gain court issue. That is another debate that we will have clearance to be able to make those decisions, to have in the future, as we increase our which means that they have to face the medical technology and are able to keep unnecessary publicity and anguish that that patients alive for longer and longer periods. I entails. They have been opposed in those place on record now that, when that debate court cases by the extreme groups, which occurs, I will support the concept of living wills adds to their anguish. As the member for so that there can be no argument about the Burleigh said, the terminally ill should be able role of the patient and the rights of the patient to die with dignity, free of pain and without within that. But I am arguing now for the rights extreme measures being taken to prolong of patients in extreme pain to have relief for their life beyond their wishes. I support this that pain when they need it without putting inclusion in the Bill. carers at risk of litigation. As I said earlier, if it Mr GRICE (Broadwater) (8.42 p.m.): I were not for the vexatious actions of the cannot understand why this Labor Goss extreme groups, this clause would not be Government is wasting the time of the needed. I repeat that this clause would not be Parliament on this Bill. It comes before us with needed, except for the actions of those a piece of legislation so flawed that it cannot groups. find support for it from any credible group in The other part of this clause that I wish to our community. Indeed, the groups we would comment on is the definition of providing expect to have a credible view on a new medical treatment, which includes withdrawing Criminal Code have bagged this one. They medical treatment. The argument for this have bagged it unmercifully, and they will clause is rather similar to that which I have continue to do so until it is withdrawn. already stated, in that vexatious litigation by Let me consider the list of groups which extreme groups has forced desperate parents have spelled out very serious reservations and family members to have such cover about the contents of this Bill. There is the included. With modern medical technology, it Queensland Bar Association—a body we is possible to keep people alive in the would all expect to contain some expertise in technical sense of the word, even when the the area of criminal law. There is also the Law patient is in a persistent vegetative state for Society of Queensland—again, a body with several years with no hope of recovery due to something to offer here. There is also the massive irreversible brain damage and atrophy Criminal Law Association, whose members of the brain. There does come a time when have a day-to-day involvement with the medical treatment must be allowed to be criminal law. We could expect the Criminal Law withdrawn to allow the family to deal with the Association to be the first body the death of their loved one and to grieve, rather Government would turn to for good advice. than that person being artificially kept alive for After all, it knows any problems existing with many years until the family becomes worn the present Code, and its shop talk would be down and loses interest. all about sensible improvements. This flawed Mr T. B. Sullivan: Do you agree with Government Bill has also been opposed by the member for Burleigh, who said that by the Office of the Director of Prosecutions, including that withdrawal of medical treatment which is within the Attorney's own portfolio Legislative Assembly 12673 15 June 1995 responsibilities, and by the Legal Aid their fate decided by their peers. They no Commission. Both of those bodies could longer have the confidence that the future expect to have notice taken of their opinions, course of their lives will be decided in the way because the public purse funds them heavily of free people for generations. Instead, they to either initiate or defend the vast bulk of will stand before a magistrate who will have criminal cases. the power to decide whether to hear the case; Most importantly, the contents of this Bill it will be entirely at the discretion of the have been trenchantly criticised by the man magistrate. who headed the committee which the In the case of a decision for summary trial Government set up to prepare it. Rob by a magistrate—the accused cannot have O'Regan chaired the Criminal Code Review the confidence that the magistrate is capable Committee, which reported to the Government of making a reasoned and fair judgment on all as far back as June 1992. I have not always the facts. To make it even worse, appeal from supported Mr O'Regan, particularly in relation a magistrate's decision on conviction will be to some CJC matters, but I have supported possible only on a point of law. That is not him in others, and I do acknowledge that he is good enough in a supposedly free society. As far better qualified to talk about the criminal well, this Bill effectively lowers the punishment law than is the Attorney-General. Importantly, for a range of serious offences by giving a Mr O'Regan was also the Government's magistrate the option to hear them. The choice to head the review committee; he was magistrate will be able to impose a maximum not foisted on the Attorney-General, but freely penalty of only two years' imprisonment for chosen by the Government to head a panel of offences which could attract three or four times experts. It is disgraceful that, three years after as much in a higher court. the O'Regan report was submitted, the Labor Goss Government has come out with This Bill is nothing more than an election something apparently unrecognisable as that ploy by a desperate Government. Labor will no doubt use its numbers here to ensure that the body's work. What was the point of that long Bill is passed, but that will not be the end of and expensive review if it was to be treated the story. I am sure that the member for with contempt? Honourable members should Indooroopilly will make major changes to this make no mistake; it was treated that way. Mr Code when he becomes Attorney-General O'Regan and his group were sent to the later this year. I look forward to supporting him reserve benches, and the Minister ran on the then. politically correct crowd. This Bill is the result of their endeavours—nobody credible has had a Mr BUDD (Redlands) (8.48 p.m.): In hand in it. common with the member for Broadwater, I I do not want to waste my time or anyone will not waste the time of this Parliament; I will else's discussing the detail of this Bill. It is just speak a few truths. better than a year away from being Mr Hamill: Be even-handed, though. implemented, and public outcry during that Mr BUDD: I will be even-handed. time will force a large number of changes. I do, however, want to mention what I consider Over the last couple of days, Opposition to be the most obnoxious provision of the members have spoken on this Bill, but about proposed new Criminal Code. Of course, that the only thing that they have had in common is the determination of the Government to is that they have all knocked the Bill from one reduce the number of cases going to trial by end of the Chamber to the other. I do not jury. Effectively, the Government has denied know the reason for that. It is either because the automatic right of an accused person to they do not understand the Code or they do trial by jury for a range of quite serious not want to understand it. offences. It has taken away a basic During his contribution, the member for democratic right which citizens have enjoyed Gregory raised quite a few issues. I will not go down the ages. That is democracy at work into the Barry Hammond episode. The Labor style! member spoke about the new clause in the Labor under Wayne Goss and the most Bill that relates to stock stealing. He had some inept Attorney I have heard of reckon that concerns about this clause. Under the old democracy equals Big Brother knows best. Code, the offence was not stock stealing; it When it drafted this Code, the Government was cattle duffing. Under the old Criminal diverted a range of serious charges away from Code, the penalty for cattle duffing was one the upper courts for hearing by magistrates. year's imprisonment. However, under the new People who are accused of offences can no Criminal Code, the penalty for stock stealing longer have confidence that they will have goes up to 14 years' imprisonment. There is a 15 June 1995 12674 Legislative Assembly big difference there. I hope that the member At the meeting Mr Cooper started by for Gregory is somewhere in the complex and saying he was there to find out what people that he hears that. The old Code's provision wanted the coalition to do. I am pleased to for cattle duffing which the Opposition say that my party members just about bit off supports—and it has said right through their tongues and refrained from answering Mr yesterday and today that it supports the old Cooper's comment. From that point on the provisions—has a substantially lower penalty meeting whipped itself into a frenzy of than that for cattle stealing in the new Code. emotion. People were talking about bringing I would like to confine the rest of my back the birch and the cat. There was a contribution to demonstrating the difference suggestion from one person that we put between the way in which this Government offenders under 18 in the stocks and throw formulates its policy and the way in which the rotten fruit at them, and that was the only Opposition formulates its policy. As all beginning. The discussion went on to honourable members would be aware, a policy referendums on capital punishment, curfews, speech was delivered by the Attorney- the reintroduction of national service and General—even before coming to office—to the castration. Those were some of the more effect that a Criminal Code Review Committee lighter offences! I will have to go back through would be established. Members would also be Hansard or the newspapers to find Mr Lester's aware that that review committee was exact comment, but he has said that there established, its final report was then issued to should be controlled capital punishment. I do the public and submissions were called. not know how one controls capital punishment; perhaps by hanging only every Mr Johnson: I'm here now. third person? What about controlled corporal Mr BUDD: The member for Gregory has punishment? Does one chop of the offender's come in to get me. hand only to the knuckles and not to the wrist? The report of the Criminal Code Review Mr Johnson: He never, ever said that. Committee became the focus of extensive Mr BUDD: He did say that; it is in community consultations, dozens of seminars, Hansard. While this was going on, Mr Cooper, scores of meetings, hundreds of submissions Mr Littleproud, Mr Laming and the National and thousands of letters involving people all candidate for Redlands sat up on the podium over Queensland. That is how this nodding their heads at this sage advice and Government formulated policy. The way the doubtless storing it up to take back to the Opposition formulates its policy is completely coalition's policy makers. Mr Cooper confirmed different. The coalition candidate for the seat this at another function in my electorate where of Redlands recently held a law and order he launched the campaign of the Opposition seminar in my electorate. candidate. Mr Cooper said, "Our policies have Mr FitzGerald: What's his name? come from the people. Therefore they will be Mr BUDD: Does the member not know? impossible for the Government to knock because, if the Government knocks our Mr FitzGerald: No. What is it? policies, they are knocking the people." Mr BUDD: That seminar was widely I am here to tonight to inform the publicised locally, and as visiting acts it Opposition that two swallows do not a summer featured Mr Cooper, Mr Littleproud and Mr make. Similarly, two dozen people—which is Laming. Very sadly, that seminar was poorly how many people were at the seminar, attended, but I am pleased to say that I did including four ALP members—letting off steam my part in trying to boost its numbers; I sent in a community hall do not represent the along a couple of ALP members to listen to viewpoint of mainstream Queensland, the pearls of wisdom divulged from those particularly as more than half the people at Opposition spokespersons. that seminar were proudly wearing Liberal Mr T. B. Sullivan: Did they come back Party rosettes and National Party name tags. empty handed? The big difference is that the Government Mr BUDD: They certainly did, and I will consults, reviews and recommends, and it has come back to what they came back with. To policies; the Opposition has absolutely none. be perfectly honest, I was very curious to find Mr J. N. GOSS (Aspley) (8.53 p.m.): out whether the coalition had any policies, The Labor Government is telling the electorate because I sit here day after day,—ike all that once this Criminal Code Bill is passed people on this side of the House—and I have crime will disappear. Nothing can be further yet to hear the Opposition put forward any from the truth. The changes will mean a period policies. of confusion, frustration and delay as the Legislative Assembly 12675 15 June 1995 wording of the new Code is tested through the Labor Party that there is something wrong each of the courts. Before this can happen, a with this new Criminal Code. This Labor number of Bills, which are complementary to Government has produced so many drafts this current Bill, have to be introduced and since the O'Regan draft was first presented to passed into law. The Jury Bill, of course, was the Minister in mid-1992 that the Minister introduced last week, but there is no sign of should withdraw the Bill and go back and read the Summary Offences Bill at this stage. Then the O'Regan draft again and again. there will be the police powers legislation, Of serious concern to people is the which will no doubt cause some controversy proposal in the Code to give a magistrate the when introduced at some time in the future. power to decide whether a whole range of The fact is that a number of these Bills have to serious offences will be decided summarily by be introduced before this legislation can be the magistrate or whether the accused will proclaimed, and it would take one to two years have a trial by jury. Surely those accused of an to become law if Labor were to win the next offence should have the right to decide if they election. It is no quick-fix for the crime want a trial by jury or to have the case heard problem, as Labor would have Queenslanders by a magistrate. That proposal takes away a believe. One only has to look at the minimum very basic right. A person accused of car theft, penalties to realise that this Labor burglary, receiving stolen property or other Government is soft on crime. offences with a maximum penalty of seven This Bill must be the most redrafted years, or drugs misuse which has a maximum legislation ever to appear before the penalty of up to 15 years, can appear before a Queensland Parliament, yet we hear from the magistrate. However, if the case is heard by legal profession that it is flawed and that we the magistrate, the maximum sentence that will have to come back here again for major can be imposed is two years' imprisonment. rewrites. If the Bill is passed it will probably go That is a classic example of where the down in history as the most amended piece of Government continues its policy of being soft legislation ever. The Criminal Code will on crime. become a disaster for the public, for the Surely it is people's right to appear before courts, and for the legal profession, all at a 12 of their peers. This Labor Government is huge cost to the community as various words taking away the right of the accused to decide and sections of it are tested. It will go through on a trial by jury. The right to trial by jury is one court after court for interpretation and of the cornerstones of our justice system. continual testing. Proposed section 320 of the new Criminal The law of this State has become a Code will take away that right. The new Code political gimmick just before an election. It has highlights the attitude of the Labor Party, been debated by almost every legal group in which is that everybody arrested is guilty. As the State. To quote David Fagan, "It is the law now stands, in most cases a pandering to the politics of being seen to be defendant may elect how he wishes to be tough on crime." In reference to the new tried—before a magistrate or by jury—but Criminal Code, Rob O'Regan said, "The code under the new Code that will be determined by is simplistic in that some of its provisions defy a magistrate. Proposed section 320 provides understanding, and the explanations—where that, if a person is convicted by a magistrate, and when given—do nothing to explain its that person may appeal to the Court of Appeal aims." on the basis that the magistrate should not The Attorney-General, for the sake of have dealt with the matter. The appellant must trying to gain a few political points for his party, prove bias or unreasonableness by the is willing to put the law of this State into turmoil magistrate. This should be of great concern to and disarray, and all this after five years of on every Queenslander. The jury system is the again, off again and pretend consultation. key to the rights and freedoms of the Now, when the legal profession has had its individual. It is the system under which one is chance to read the Code in full, criticisms have judged by one's peers and not by the State. flowed in. The Attorney-General has put his Public confidence in our legal system will head in the sand and is attacking everyone dwindle if people are not given the right to trial who offers any form of criticism. When the by jury. All Queenslanders should remember Attorney-General is put in a corner by the legal that they could be arrested, and know that profession, he casts a wide net to spread the they are innocent, but be denied a trial by jury. blame. Groups that do not agree with the new One of the aims of this Bill—and it is quite Code include the Bar Association, the Law clear—is that the Government wishes to Society, the Criminal Law Association, and the unclog, so to speak, the upper courts system. Director of Prosecutions. Surely that is telling One may say that it is good to have justice 15 June 1995 12676 Legislative Assembly proceed through the system quickly, but it is all number of initiatives the Government is at the cost of the system of justice as we know proposing to introduce this year." it today. However, the unclogging of the upper The article continues— courts will be at the expense of the Magistrates Courts system, which in turn will "Watch the headlines for statements become clogged. The purpose of the Bill is highlighting the increase in police also to reduce the cost of justice, reduce jury numbers over the past three years. And costs, allow for the appointment of more yet, as last month's editorial noted, there magistrates, and pave the way for fewer highly appear to be increasing staff shortages paid judges. To the Labor Party, reducing the especially in operational areas all over the monetary cost of justice appears to be more State. There will be promises of extra important than justice itself. This Code is a police over the period of the next three document designed to give the image of a years and continued civilianisation of non- Government tough on crime. Because of its operational roles. Exactly how many inadequacies it will in the longer term, and positions have been civilianised is hard to perhaps in the medium term, have the tell. How many of you even know a police opposite effect. officer whose job has been civilianised, thereby releasing that officer to I would like briefly to pay a tribute to the operational duties? Of course, the Police Service. The police work long and hard Government is unlikely to mention that it to do their best. This new Code can only let has decided not to employ police support the police down in their efforts to try to clear officers. Such a move would have the streets of the criminals and the thugs that released a large number of police from this Government has seen rise up in our front counters, communications rooms community. We can think back to 1988 and and watchhouses." Expo, when international visitors proclaimed that Queensland, and Brisbane in particular, The author of the article then comments on was one of the safest cities in the world. legislation that is being introduced into the People walked the streets and through the House. This article was written in April 1995. It Botanic Gardens late at night without fear of continues— getting mugged. People are not game to walk "Other initiatives which we can there now. They cannot even walk down the probably expect to be up and running in city mall at night without getting mugged. time for a law and order election include Since 1988, the rampant crime that has the revised Criminal Code and a Police impacted on the people of this city is nothing Powers Bill. A revised Criminal Code can short of disgusting. This Government should be expected to reduce the number of hang its head in shame, and this new Criminal obsolete laws and be phrased in simple Code will do nothing to solve the problem. English. The Police Powers Bill can be expected to simplify the current continuing Mr DAVIDSON (Noosa) (9.05 p.m.): We number and types of police powers all need to appreciate the fact that this spread across the many statutes police Criminal Code has been rushed into the are expected to enforce. A boon, you House to give the Goss Labor Government may say. the appearance that it is tough on crime. Having realised some time ago that law and If only it were that simple. The order would be a major issue in the election to introduction of any new legislation has the be held this year, the Goss Government has potential to cause problems. These two frantically attempted to give this new Criminal proposed Statutes are going to vastly Code a very tough appearance. It was an increase the flow of revenue to the legal attempt to fool the people of Queensland in profession. Just think of the number of this election year—a poor, shoddy attempt to legal arguments which will be required to give people hope and to give all victims of establish precedent in these two critical crime the hope that justice will be done. I areas. would like to read from the editor's column in a Police officers can expect a police journal of April 1995. Under the considerable increase in work load, not headline "There will be a State Government only in learning the new legislation, but in election later this year" the article stated— preparing for the inevitable round of "This will come as no surprise, even appeals which will be generated in order to those who have not counted the years to interpret the exact meaning of each between the last election and now. and every word and phrase of the 'simple Recent headlines have indicated a English'. There will also be a whole new Legislative Assembly 12677 15 June 1995

set of procedures for police to learn in these issues. For some time now daily I have addition to the legislation. been receiving complaints from people in my We can expect some frustrating electorate about the lack of police presence times ahead as criminals are acquitted on our streets. I raised this issue last year and because of legal interpretations. It is the department provided a Police Beat unlikely that the Government will step shopfront in Noosa Heads. I believe Noosa forward and admit fault with the drafting of Council is progressing with discussions with the legislation. So who gets the blame? Department of Lands for the acquisition of a site and ultimately to construct a shopfront to All in all the next five months are house two police officers and one non- going to be pretty exciting for police operational public servant. I must say that I officers. We'll get a promise of more am not sure that the local government should police somewhere, a Clayton's pay rise. be left with the responsibility for constructing a New initiatives to reduce crime, and facility for the use of State services, namely, revised and new legislation to make our the Queensland Police Service. I have job easier—or will we?" received many complaints in recent times from It is quite well known in my electorate that business operators, residents and tourists in police are totally understaffed and Hastings Street. There seems to be a limited underresourced. For well over a year I have police presence at night when currently two been raising this fact with the Minister for officers are supposedly assigned to the Noosa Police. I have written to him many times. I Heads/Hastings Street area. have met with him. He has had meetings with Approximately one month ago, I other people in my electorate. It has got to the attempted to have faxed to me from the stage that police are certainly under a hell of a Cooroy Police Station a letter from a lot of pressure. Although we have 26 officers constituent who had written a complaint to me. assigned to the station, in the last month or To my surprise, I was advised that they did not two the officer-in-charge has gone on sick have a photocopier or a facsimile machine at leave and we have another senior officer on that station. I wrote to the Minister, and I sick leave. I believe that the other day another believe that a week or ten days ago that officer went on sick leave. So we have three station received a photocopier. I am very officers on sick leave, and I believe some of grateful to the Minister for that. them are considering taking stress leave. Major problems arise with police presence Although 26-odd officers are assigned to that because of lack of numbers. My research station, my understanding is that at the indicates that no real increase in police moment only 12 are rostered on for duty. numbers in Noosa Heads has occurred since Every day I am receiving more and more 1989. Although 28 officers may be assigned complaints from constituents about the lack of to the Noosa Heads Police Station, invariably police presence and poor response time. only 14 to 16 officers are rostered on duty. As Just a couple of weeks ago a taxi driver in I said, in the past few weeks only 10 or 12 Hastings Street had the misfortune of colliding officers have been on duty at that station. It with a driver who was under the influence of appears that two of those 28 officers have alcohol. Poor bugger, with the downturn in been assigned to the Juvenile Aid Bureau, two business—the downturn in the building are in the Communications Centre in industry and all other sectors—being brought Maroochydore, one is serving in Haiti, one is on in my electorate by this Government, he is assigned to gathering police intelligence, one just about going broke and really battling to is relieving in Eumundi, four are either on make a dollar. They are really battling to make holiday or study leave, and the officer in a dollar up there. I shall return to the poor taxi charge is a non-operational policeman. As I driver. He and two of his mates took off after said, he is on sick leave. this fellow who was obviously under the I understand that there was a major influence and they caught up with him in his operation in Noosa on Friday night, 10 March old Falcon car. They ran him off the road, and that some 28 officers were on duty, many pulled him out of the car and detained him. from outside the Noosa area. March is They radioed through to the Noosa Heads traditionally a quiet time in Noosa, and I Police Station. I believe it took the police an believe that that operation would have proved hour and 15 minutes to get there. By that time to be a serious waste of time and resources. the bloke had sobered up. Such operations should be planned for peak Those sorts of problems are being raised tourism times when behavioural problems are with me all the time. I have raised many of more evident and frequent. 15 June 1995 12678 Legislative Assembly

At times, only two officers are rostered on Coolum Police Station should have an extra duty. Even the investigation of a domestic six officers, Cooroy Police Station needs violence complaint can take two to three hours another four officers, and Noosa Heads should of their time. The local police can also lose a have another ten officers assigned in order to similar amount of time transporting dementia bring the Noosa electorate up to a fair and patients from my electorate to the Nambour acceptable staffing level that compares with Hospital. This happens from time to time. A that of the rest of the State. Law, order and couple of weeks ago, the police working the security of lifestyle are very basic requirements nightshift had reason to detain a dementia of our society, and I will continue to pursue the patient whom they were unable to place assignment of those much-needed officers to anywhere on the Sunshine Coast. They left police stations within my electorate. Noosa shortly after 12 midnight and drove that All honourable members would be aware patient to the PA in Brisbane. Owing to that just about every bank in Queensland now travelling time and the time spent waiting at has a security guard at its front door. the PA while that patient was admitted, they Shopping centres and all sorts of other high- did not return to Noosa until 8 a.m. That task profile businesses have employed security took eight hours, which ultimately meant that guards. I am concerned that criminals have there was no police presence in town during avoided conducting their activities at those that time. business institutions and, for a time, have Noosa police officers find that, after they focused on small business. But having been a have detained juveniles, because of a lack of small-business person myself, I am aware facilities on the Sunshine Coast they often that, in the past six or seven years, most spend several hours attempting to find small-business people have employed all sorts acceptable institutions in which to safely place of security devices in their businesses. I think those children. Police are not permitted to hold every small business has some sort of alarm juveniles in watch-house cells, and it is a system, and many are back-to-base alarm requirement for them to be under full systems. In many cases, surveillance cameras surveillance while in police custody. In the are installed in small businesses. The past, I have raised the matter of the Noosa increased security at banks, shopping centres Heads police watch-house and the fact that and small businesses has led to criminals those cells need to be upgraded and video focusing on street crime, such as snatching equipment installed so that police are able to handbags from women, and breaking into and keep all detainees under surveillance. I have entering houses. also asked the Minister to consider the We hear constantly of how residents are employment of security guards or other able to use reasonable force to defend personnel in the Noosa area to keep themselves; but frail, elderly people have detainees under surveillance in the watch- complained to me, asking how they are house to enable the police to be free to expected to use reasonable force. They are at continue their normal duties. When one the whim of criminals. In common with many compares Noosa police numbers with the people in my electorate, I am concerned that State average, one finds that the people of although we can now have a shoot-out in the Noosa are disadvantaged by the numbers of dining room, most residents in my electorate police allocated to that area. Ballpark figures do not own or possess a firearm. Those suggest that the average is currently one people are concerned that criminals will go to policeman per 500 people, whereas in Noosa the scene of the crime—those people's it is closer to one per thousand. In peak homes—armed. It is unfair to expect people to holiday times, when perhaps 20,000 to 30,000 accept the hope offered by this Government: people are visiting the area, those figures are the use of reasonable force in their own even more disparate. Tourism is the lifeblood homes. That is especially the case for of Noosa, and business people tell me someone who is elderly, frail, disabled or does continually that regular customers are leaving not have the will to become involved in a brawl and vowing never to return because they no in his or her own lounge room with a person longer feel safe on our streets. I believe that who has broken into that house. I believe that the policing situation is rapidly approaching this Criminal Code is designed to give people crisis point, and if more officers are not hope through the severity of the maximum allocated to police stations in my electorate we sentences. will face the very real threat of vigilante groups being formed. I am concerned about the lack of places in watch-houses. All honourable members The present police quota is unacceptable would be aware of the overcrowding at watch- on a justice and equity basis. I believe that houses and the fact that most detention Legislative Assembly 12679 15 June 1995 centres are operating at capacity. Because of introduce amendments to this legislation, I will the lack of available space in the centres in not shed any tears over it. This Government the south-east corner, people are being flown will introduce proper amendments to the to Townsville and housed there. This Code. However, the lot opposite are opposing legislation is all about hope. The Goss the Bill in toto. The Criminal Code has existed Government is hoping that people will think for 100 years, and to oppose a total redrafting that it is getting a lot tougher on crime. As all of the Code after all that time is crazy. The members on this side of the House would be Opposition has lost the plot. It does not see aware, the Goss Government has been soft the big picture. It is not approaching the Bill in on crime from the day it was elected. It will be a constructive way. up to the coalition, when it wins Government We have heard speeches by Opposition after this election, not to give people hope but member after Opposition member. Most of to put in place legislation that ensures the them, like the last couple, referred to issues security of all people's lifestyles. affecting their electorates. However, Mr D'ARCY (Woodridge) (9.19 p.m.) The Opposition members are not actually speaking most predictable point about this legislation is to the Bill. They are not saying, "After 100 that the Opposition is opposing it. For 100 years of the Criminal Code, let us give this Bill years, we have been using legislation that was a go." That is why the Opposition is, in fact, in drafted in the nineteenth century for the Opposition and that is why it will stay there. It twentieth century. In its headline "Queensland has no foresight, and no real policy. updates archaic criminal code", the Cairns Opposition members have not said, "We are Post of 8 December 1994 described that looking at the draft." The Opposition has not legislation as archaic. The statements of spelt out in a constructive way its objections to Opposition members that this legislation has the Bill. That is my major objection to the been forced upon them and that they have speeches from Opposition members that I been dragged in are mythical, because all heard today, yesterday and, no doubt, will honourable members are aware that this continue to hear. legislation has been four years in the drafting. I have always wanted to see in this That has been stated in newspapers Parliament a redrafting of the Criminal Code. everywhere. That drafting has taken a long One thing that has not been spelt out is that time. this Code, like any other Code, is used by the I have listened to most of the speakers in public. As I mentioned, the laws in the Criminal this debate, which is about the Criminal Code. Code relating to duelling have not been used The contributions of Opposition members by our judiciary because we live in the modern have shown that they have absolutely no world. However, quite frankly, some members policy. After 100 years of putting up with of the judiciary are like the Opposition—they archaic legislation that deals with relics—as still have not come to terms with the Criminal one newspaper put it—laws dealing with Code, which is 100 years old. They cannot witchcraft, duels and defaming of foreign implement it now. We have heard a lot of princes have been expunged. After all that cases in which the judiciary have got it wrong. time, all we have heard from the Opposition is Members have heard about such cases that criticism. I have not heard anything about what affect their constituents. However, despite the it intends to replace the 100-year-old Code judiciary failing to implement the Criminal Code with. The Opposition has attacked everything correctly, the Opposition still opposes the about this Bill. It is a travesty of justice that the redrafting of the Code. Opposition has adopted the tactic of finding opponents of any section of this massive This new Code has been four years in the redraft of the Criminal Code and then saying making. There has been plenty of input. All I that those people oppose it in total. can say is: let us give it a go. As for the application of the Code—as society evolves, Mr FitzGerald: You're dead right. the judiciary, the lawyers and the prosecutors You've got it. There are opponents to a will change their opinions about how the Code number of other clauses in that Bill, and it is should be implemented. I have not heard the going to give you problems. Opposition raise any aspects of the Code that Mr D'ARCY: I will admit that nobody it believes are contrary to the public interest. It would deny that. However, we are redrafting is not opposed to the new sentencing totally the Criminal Code, and Opposition arrangements; it is just opposing for the sake members are opposing it in its entirety. I have of opposing an innovative piece of legislation. been a member of this place for long enough That upsets me. I do not believe that the to know that if the Government has to Opposition is prepared to give anything a go. 15 June 1995 12680 Legislative Assembly

Members of Parliament are always charming young ladies who are quoting from the media. The Courier-Mail has representatives of the Toowoomba Carnival of always been critical of most Governments. It Flowers. Tonight, they were gallantly hosted in has been the base conscience for the way in this place by my colleague the member for which Governments should behave. I can Toowoomba South and me. It may be a tough remember members of the National Party job, but someone has to do it. As most Government and the National and Liberal members would know, the Toowoomba Party Governments rising in this place and Carnival of Flowers is one of the major tourist blasting the Courier-Mail, as do Labor attractions of the City of Toowoomba. These Government members. However, when this Bill charming young ladies are doing their best to first hit the deck, on 15 December, an editorial continue to raise the profile of Toowoomba. It in the Courier-Mail stated— was a pleasure to host them in this place "Few people will find anything to tonight. trouble them in the new draft Queensland In rising to speak to the Criminal Code Criminal Code . . . Creating one crime of legislation, let me say that on reading the burglary . . ." Minister's second-reading speech when the It went on to state— Code was presented to the Parliament, and not having any legal experience myself, I have "Most of the proposed new Code is to admit that I was pleasantly surprised when eminently sensible and in tune with the Minister stated— modern views that reject archaic male- oriented concepts about . . . sexual "This is also a Code which removes crime." the legalese which has obscured the law from ordinary people for too long. The law This legislation was necessary because should be accessible to the people. It we had to do something about the current should be easy to find, easy to Criminal Code, which has been on the statute understand and easy to read. Through book for over a century. This Government is the use of plain English, this Code is a doing something about it. Instead of document which any person could pick Opposition members saying, "We will present up, read and understand." a Bill that will redraft the sections of the Criminal Code that we do not like", we are I thought to myself, "I will read the hearing total opposition to the Bill. Quite Criminal Code, because perhaps it is different frankly, I find it offensive that the Opposition, from the first few drafts that were put into the when it was in Government, did not redraft the general arena for so-called consultation." Criminal Code. It should have done so years However, that statement, in itself, was enough and years ago. The Criminal Code is a living for not only me, without any legal experience, thing. It will be adjusted and altered by the but many people in my electorate who sought judiciary and other people who work inside and copies of the document, to believe that this outside the system. document would be easy to understand. As I said, I then decided to read the Criminal Code We are debating this legislation just to try to compare it with the previous Criminal before an election. This Code has been Code, and it did not take me long to realise introduced as an innovative piece of that the Minister's words—and I will repeat legislation. The fact of life is—and Opposition them— members know this as well as I do—that the Code will not be implemented for quite some "Through the use of plain English, time because other legislation has to be this Code is a document which any amended to put this Code into sync with person could pick up, read and existing legislation. The Opposition is claiming understand"— that this Code is going to change our lives were far from reassuring for not just me but overnight. It is time that the Opposition moved many other people in my electorate. onwards and changed with the times. As I When I started reading the Code it did not said, I do not mind if, in 12 months' or two take me long to find some classic cases of years' time, we have to introduce Wells-speak and not an example of—again to amendments to this legislation. Basically, it is quote the Minister—"something that any a good Bill. It is innovative and it is a change person could pick up, read and understand". that is necessary for Queensland. For example, let me turn to Part 6 of the Mr HEALY (Toowoomba North) Code—Responsibility. One specific area of (9.27 p.m.): Before I make my contribution interest to me was intoxication. Because my tonight, I would like to acknowledge the family background for some 33 years in presence in the parliamentary precincts of 11 Toowoomba has been in the hotel and liquor Legislative Assembly 12681 15 June 1995 industry, and still is to this day, it is of interest There was already enormous pressure on to me. I am proud to say that, so I was courts, in particular in my area of Toowoomba, interested to read this particular part of the even before this Code was introduced. I have Code on intoxication to find out exactly what written to the Minister and placed questions on the new Code was going to say. In Part 6— notice about staff appointments at the Responsibility, Division 1—State of mind, Toowoomba Court House. I thank the Minister emergency and immaturity states— for his replies to questions on notice and "51(1) A person's act does not correspondence. However, his answers do not happen independently of the person's will, disguise the fact that Toowoomba has been and an event caused by a person does without a full-time permanent registrar/area not happen by accident, because the manager for 12 months. Even an eventual person was intoxicated at the time of the appointment would not disguise the fact that act. not only have some courthouse staff been placed under immense pressure in acting (2) However, subsection (1) does not positions but also, with a new courtroom to be apply if the intoxication was caused by an built, more work for the staff will be act that happened independently of the forthcoming. The ramifications of having to person's will or was an event that interpret the new Criminal Code will see more happened by accident. delays in court procedure and more pressure (3) Also, if a specific state of mind or on court staff. an intention to cause a specific result is Despite the bleatings of the Attorney- an element of an offence, a person's General and Government members that it is a intentional or unintentional intoxication tough Criminal Code, the Code fails to may be considered to decide whether the convince Queenslanders that this is the case. person had the state of mind or Clause 320, under the heading, "When a intention." charge for an indictable offence may be And then clause 51(4) gives a definition of decided summarily", gives rise to a suspicion "intoxicated". in the community that the Government is providing softer options for sentencing The now famous clause 10 of the criminals, not so much by allowing a proposed new Criminal Code, which has been magistrate the discretion of whether or not a quoted by honourable members during this person may be allowed a trial by jury but more long debate, under the heading of "Previous so by the fact that, if a person is not allowed conviction or acquittal", states— that right, a maximum sentence of only two "It is a defence to a charge of an years' imprisonment may apply if convicted by offence (the 'current' charge and offence) the magistrate. to show that the charged person has In that light, under the new Criminal Code, already been tried, and convicted or if a magistrate decides to hear the case of a acquitted on— person charged with offences such as serious (a) a charge on which the person drug use offences, burglary, unlawful could have been convicted of the possession of a vehicle or the receiving of current offence; or tainted property instead of sending the person to trial by jury, it appears that the maximum (b) a charge of an offence of which sentence that he or she can impose is two the person could be convicted on the years' imprisonment. And yet under normal current charge." circumstances persons tried and convicted of These sections in particular make a mockery offences such as serious drug offences would of the Attorney-General's belief and receive a maximum sentence of 15 years' statements that this Code is easy for anyone gaol; for burglary, a maximum of life to pick up, read and understand. It is a Code imprisonment—if honourable members want that has been written for some sections of the to believe this Government; for the unlawful legal profession who will take great delight in possession of a vehicle, a maximum penalty seeing hours and hours of precious time being of 14 years' gaol; and for the receiving of wasted on interpretation in the Court of tainted property, a maximum penalty of 14 Appeal. That, of course, will be horrendous for years' gaol. The community sees this section the public, the courts, the prosecutors and the of the Code as a soft approach to sentencing. legal practitioners, the majority of whom The community will see this section of the genuinely want to provide the best possible Criminal Code as this Government's sell-out to legal service to the people. the civil libertarians, who say that harsh 15 June 1995 12682 Legislative Assembly penalties such as longer gaol sentences do the law as it stands and that the penalty fits not work. the crime. I cite an instance in Toowoomba recently The proposed Criminal Code will not that has outraged the community and cast satisfy the community that the Government is enormous doubts on the ability of this fair dinkum about addressing the increased Government to legislate in relation to tougher crime rate. Time after time in this House over penalties for crime. A few months ago, a large the many hours of debate, Government section of the Toowoomba Cemetery was members have tried to defend the Attorney- vandalised. Not just a few headstones were General's decision to change the Criminal damaged; between $70,000 and $80,000 Code by claiming that, in the 32 years of worth of devastation was caused. Headstones National/Liberal Party Governments, no such were systematically kicked over and smashed, attempt was made. That is quite correct. I some beyond repair. Graves were desecrated, congratulate those National and Liberal Party including those with headstones that have Governments that did not change the Criminal been standing there for some hundreds of Code. I also congratulate the Labor years. Three young people were arrested, Governments prior to 1957 that decided not to charged, convicted and sentenced to perform change the Criminal Code. In those halcyon 120 hours of community service. days of Labor rule before 1957, they did not I personally believe that the desecration need to change the Criminal Code. The of a grave or grave site is one of the most Liberal/National Party Governments after 1957 despicable and vile acts that can be did not need to change the Criminal Code. perpetrated. The whole nation was outraged The old Criminal Code is just as relevant today by the recent desecration of Eddie Mabo's as it was on the first day it came into force on grave in Townsville. National media coverage 1 January 1901. Sir Samuel Griffith, a former spawned outrage from every sector of the Premier of Queensland, Chief Justice of the community. And if those responsible for the Supreme Court and first Chief Justice of the Mabo grave desecration are caught and High Court, knew what he was doing. He had convicted, what will their sentence be? I bet prepared a document meant to stand the test that it will be much more than 120 hours of of time, with plenty of scope for amendment community service. In relation to the where necessary. Toowoomba incident, both the Premier and The Government becomes very prickly the Attorney-General have been written to and when members of the Opposition claim that called on to review the case. There have been the new Criminal Code is nothing more than a calls for some compensation for the political document aimed at being passed in Toowoomba City Council. Representatives this Parliament and used as a political tool from the Toowoomba City Council have before the State election. Of course it is a contacted the Premier. It is ironic that some of political document! As has been said before, it the repair work has been carried out by some will not come fully into effect for more than 12 of the prisoners who are now assigned to the months because of all of the complementary new Queensland Corrective Services legislation that either has to be amended or Commission establishment at Westbrook for initiated. low and open-security prisoners. I have received many calls and letters However, the fact of the matter is that, from people in my electorate who are although the community may see that it is a genuinely worried and concerned about clause good thing that some of these prisoners are 82 of this legislation, particularly in relation to doing community work as part of their the door being left open to the suggestion that sentence, they are still outraged by the fact inserting the definition of "providing medical that the young people who committed a crime treatment" to include withdrawing medical which tears at the very core of people's treatment would lead to legalised euthanasia. hearts—and there was $70,000 or $80,000 Rob O'Regan, QC, himself, in that now much- worth of damage at that cemetery—are able debated Australian newspaper article which to escape with a community service order, has been brought up so often tonight, said which they may not complete. The community that the section of the Code designed to cover feels that it has been let down by this palliative care was clouded by the definition of Government. We should not have to write to "providing medical treatment" and that it could the Attorney-General and the Premier about create a possibility of legalised euthanasia. this problem on behalf of the community. We Government members have blasted that should be satisfied that the law is there to article as being nothing more than protect persons and property, that someone propaganda, but it has now been over a week who breaks that law will feel the full force of since the article was printed and I have not Legislative Assembly 12683 15 June 1995 seen or heard any other article or news item in I want to outline what occurred a few which Mr O'Regan has disputed what was said years ago on the Currawong property—a in the article. Palliative care and its definition property 30 kilometres south west of Taroom should have been left alone, and who will in the Dawson River country and 400 believe the Attorney-General when he said in kilometres north west of Brisbane. Once the material tabled yesterday that there is no country so thick with brigalow scrub that one intention under clause 82 of the Code to could hardly ride through it, today the area is legalise the practice of euthanasia in open, improved-pasture grazing land. One Queensland or to diminish the force of existing side of Currawong is a shire by-road from the statutory prohibition against euthanasia? Roma-Taroom Road to Wandoan. Some of If the Government wanted to change the stunted brigalow which covered the certain sections of the Criminal Code, why did landscape still grows along the sides of the it not do that simply by way of amendment? road, and this scrub made a perfect temporary Perhaps some of those amendments may barrier for the duffers who stole 26 head of have gained bipartisan support. But, no, it Currawong cattle. wanted to satisfy its own ego by claiming to Mr Dollin: Is that all they took? honour one of its pre-1989 election Mr PERRETT: Unwittingly, the local promises—that is, to rewrite the Criminal council helped, too. Workmen dumped a load Code—even though the process has been of gravel near one of the clumps of brigalow, denigrated by every legal group in making a good loading ramp. When the 26 Queensland, even though one of the original cattle got out into the road lane through a authors of the initial draft has cast grave broken fence, the thieves simply backed a doubts on the final product, and even though truck up to the gravel pile, broke off some of this pre-1989 election promise was one that the brigalow to make a brush race and a small nobody wanted the Government to keep. yard, herded the cattle onto the truck and There was no need to introduce the new disappeared. Those cattle were worth as much Criminal Code. No-one else has attempted to as $1,000 each. If a person robbed a bank of do so because no-one else had the stupidity that amount, that person would be doing time. to try it. Only this arrogant and stupid Labor Government would try to pull off a stunt like Mr Dollin: And they say there's no this, and it will be long remembered for the money in grazing! problems it will cause in the future. Mr PERRETT: I take that interjection. There would be plenty of money in grazing Mr PERRETT (Barambah) (9.41 p.m.): I were it not for the costs that Labor rise to contribute to the debate on the new Governments, both in Queensland and Criminal Code. I want to concentrate on one Canberra, have imposed upon the graziers particular aspect of the Code, even though in and farmers of this State. Labor Governments my view many of its provisions are totally have milked farmers and graziers dry. They flawed. That is a view shared by many legal are just another of the parasites that farmers eagles—people much smarter than any face, along with drought and stock thieves. member of this House. Various groups have claimed that the new Code will create all sorts The fines and penalties for stock theft are of problems in this State. I have no reason to a joke. The Stock Squads are understaffed, argue with those claims. and they cannot be everywhere at once. The owner of Currawong stated that, when his I want to concentrate on stock stealing, cattle went, the Stock Squad got straight onto because it is a problem for rural Queensland. it. That property owner offered a $5,000 Bad things come mostly in threes. For farmers reward, but no trace was found. Any particular and graziers, they are drought, stock theft and theft is usually one of more than two dozen Labor Governments. In common with drought with which any Stock Squad must deal at any and Labor Governments, stock theft has one time. The squads are underresourced. always been a problem and always will be. Armed with a four-wheel drive, a horse float, a Stock theft—or duffing, as it is called in motorbike and a swag, they have to cover Australian folklore—is usually one of the huge areas. unseen and unreported crimes. For those who lose valuable stock—whether it be cattle, Mr Szczerbanik: A mobile phone. horses, sheep, goats or pigs—there is nothing Mr PERRETT: Mobile phones do not romantic about it. From Cape York to work out there, you goose! I am talking about Birdsville, from the Brisbane Valley to the gulf, western Queensland. the duffer has his eye open for a chance to The squads have to cover huge areas. steal some stock. For instance, the Roma squad has to cover 15 June 1995 12684 Legislative Assembly from the Carnarvon ranges to the New South through the south Burnett—my own Wales border and from Dalby almost to electorate. It is harder to keep an eye on the Charleville. The uniform of Stock Squad rough mountain cattle country than the closely members is usually jeans, a stockman's shirt, settled dairy land on the coast. One particular a hat and riding boots. They speak the problem for Stock Squad members is the language of the bush. They are at home in "blockies"—people who have small blocks of the saddle or at a cattle sale and, like any land but do not live on their land. They run a good policeman, they are on duty at all times. few stock and sometimes check their However, members of Stock Squads are not properties only a couple of times a year. Stock like any ordinary policeman. They do not have goes missing and they have not even been an ordinary policeman's job. They must try to branded. Often, such people cannot even believe stories about stolen stock. Sometimes, describe their animals. those stories are a bit hard to believe. Good roads and road trains have Sometimes, the stock were not even missing changed the face of stock stealing, but the but were just missed in the muster. A case in Stock Squad continually comes across which a grazier reported some cattle stolen a ingenious criminals. I want to relate a story year before turned up in a muster soon after. from Mungindi, just over the Queensland Some cases on the files date back a year border, where a property was losing exactly 50 or more—like the 233 cattle which went sheep every so often. The thief turned out to missing a couple of years ago from be an old-timer with a car and caravan who Womblebank, one of the large properties in would fill his caravan with sheep. More the Injune district. As well, 91 cows ambitious was a thief who transported stolen disappeared from a property beside the stock in a refrigerated semitrailer, the cattle Moonie Highway running through the western inside unable to be seen. Another anecdote Darling Downs south east of Roma, and more from the times before trucks, when duffing was than 1,000 sheep were stolen from a property done on horseback, tells of a pair of thieves between St George and Dirranbandi. Stock who were driving a mob of stolen cattle when theft ranges from the duffing of one calf to they saw a mounted policeman approaching. semitrailer loads, but most instances involve They headed bush, leaving the cattle for the only small numbers. Stock Squads around the policeman—who was really another duffer State make arrests when they can find hard wearing a stolen uniform! evidence, but most of their work is Modern technology brought the light surveillance, checking stock being moved in aircraft. One manager of a large company- road trains, attending sales at the various owned station in the Clermont district of central centres and being seen around the problem Queensland convinced his boss that he areas. should learn to fly so that he could keep an "Turning over" is the Stock Squad term for eye on the small land-holders who ringed the mustering and checking all stock in a police station. He claimed that, from the air, one operation, and sometimes the squad could see the dust of a driven mob. When an members are suspicious that the complaint is aircraft flew over, the duffers would disappear made simply to get a free muster. Even if a into the scrub and leave the cattle. So cattle Stock Squad team does not come up with any duffing has a wealth of stories, some missing cattle, the activity is considered worth embellished in the telling. while because the turning over has a Today, Stock Squad members do not psychological effect on duffers; they are often face much of the antipathy of many of the no longer seen to be active in a particular frontier cattlemen of the last century for whom area. Many graziers are also at fault, because duffing was a way of life, but while there are they are slack about identifying their stock sheep and cattle grazing anywhere in this properly. Sometimes, they do not brand their State, there will always be people who cannot animals at all. Branding is not required by law, help themselves. So what should we do? I except when a beast to be sold is over 100 think that we have to take a pretty serious look kilograms in weight. Many people have bought at this problem. Recent cases have reinforced stock but have not bothered to cross-brand perceptions that stock stealing is a minor them. offence. Our new laws are required to provide Stock Squads in various parts of the State stiffer penalties for stock stealing, because the have different problems. The spreading real cost is to the victims of the theft and the western sheep country is far different from the police Stock Squad, who work in some small properties of the eastern Darling Downs instances for many months before charges are or on the eastern side of the range and laid. Legislative Assembly 12685 15 June 1995

Lack of adequate penalties is no carry more severe penalties than stock deterrent to thieves who show little respect for stealing. Industry groups have made the law. Earlier tonight, the member for numerous submissions to the Government, Redlands talked about the stiffer penalties in but to no avail. the Code, but it is no good having stiffer I am sure that mandatory recording of penalties if the courts do not impose the convictions for stock theft where guilt is proper penalties—they have to be a deterrent admitted or proven would be welcomed by to stock thieves. There may be a place for stock owners all over the State. Convicted cattle duffers or poddy dodgers in some persons should have an immediate romantic history of the past, but these days it suspension of their move-easy permits, and is stock stealing and it means what it says. It is earlier tonight I heard my colleague the the act of a criminal and each year it costs member for Gregory talk about the many farmers and graziers a fortune. It is the theft of difficulties associated with the new move-easy a producer's livelihood and the law must treat system under which stock owners can write it that way. their own permits. When the legislation relating Currently, the Stock Squad is very to move-easy permits was passed by this understaffed—there are just over 20 in the House—that is, writing one's own permit to State. The Cattlemen's Union has reported travel stock—we predicted that it would be a that approximately 320 people are convicted licence for stock thieves. We predicted that of stock stealing per year, and most are fined when grubby stock thieves got their hands on less than $300. I cannot emphasise enough their own permit book it would create the fact that the increased penalties provided problems, and it has. in this Bill must be enforced, otherwise the We believe that people convicted of stock Code is not worth the paper it is written on. stealing should have all of the equipment that Maybe these cases need to be heard by a was used in that offence confiscated. That specialist judge, because stock stealing is not would certainly be a deterrent. Plea bargaining a crime that is familiar to many of the judges or dropping of charges should not be entered who sit on these cases. into in cases of stock stealing and more Regionalisation of the Police Service has significant penalties should be applied to hamstrung the operations of the squad, and people found guilty of this offence. Penalties crimes are not regionalised as our police are. must be enforceable, otherwise this Code is Lack of coordination between police districts not worth the paper it is written on. makes clear-up very difficult. The Government Once upon a time, if we go back to needs to address the inflexibility of folklore, horse thieves were shot on sight—I regionalisation so that the squad is not am sure that that was a deterrent. Today, they hampered in the execution of its duty, and the get a penalty of something less than $300 on operations of the squad need to be average, and many of them get off scot-free. coordinated between regions. The When listening to the wailing that is coming appointment of a Stock Squad coordinator from the back benches tonight, it sounds like would be justified and welcomed. they are supporting stock thieves. Police officers do their best, but they are Mr Dollin interjected. hampered by low staffing numbers across vast Mr PERRETT: The member for areas, and they are sometimes assigned to Maryborough is having a lot to say. He has other duties. There is a need for adequate knocked around the bush a fair bit. When I funding for overtime, which they do not have. said that there were 26 head taken from the Graziers sometimes have to wait too long for Currawong property, he said, "Is that all they an investigation to take place, and the Stock took?" Squad is of the view that, if it cannot get to the property in three days, there is no point going Mr Dollin interjected. because the stock would already be Mr PERRETT: Mr Deputy Speaker, I slaughtered. think we are on the verge of an admission. I think the member's past is catching up with There is no doubt that the presence of an him. I think he is feeling guilty. We have effective Stock Squad would deter cattle somebody in this House who is an expert on duffers, provided that the graziers have stock theft—an old poddy dodger from the identified their stock properly. Tougher past. penalties are needed and the courts must enforce the law. Graziers can be excused for Mr Quinn interjected. believing that the authorities do not care about Mr PERRETT: Certainly if he did have a the problem when shoplifting offences often conscience he would admit it, but obviously he 15 June 1995 12686 Legislative Assembly does not have a conscience so he is not brought in with much fanfare; yet no-one knew about to admit it here. who was going to run the courses or how There are many things I would like to say people would receive their commissions. It was about this Bill, but it has all been said by my the greatest shemozzle one could ever see, colleagues. I believe that this legislation is and that lasted 12 to 18 months until flawed; there are lots of problems with it. If this Government members got themselves sorted Bill can ensure that there will be proper out. deterrents to stock theft in this State, if it will This Code applies to adults aged 17 years lead to the poddy dodgers being put behind and over. It mainly sets out the maximum bars where they should have been put all sentences and penalties for offences, but it is along and if we see the courts imposing what not the be-all and end-all; it is one part of an is actually written in the Bill—that is, that entire system involving the Penalties and offenders do get 14 years' imprisonment—I Sentences Act. The guidelines and principles believe that the Government will receive a lot outlined at the commencement of that Act set of support from the stock owners of this State. out the process of sentencing and penalties, Having said that, we will be watching with such as community service, and tell judges interest to see whether there is any change in what they can and cannot do. Of course, they circumstances or whether we get more of the also include the famous line about gaol being same. a last resort. Mr HORAN (Toowoomba South) Also under this umbrella is the Juvenile (9.59 p.m.): It is with pleasure that in the dying Justice Act. Many of the law and order days of a dying Government I join this debate problems relate to the actions of juveniles. on the Criminal Code. It is no wonder that this One need only talk to people in the Juvenile Government has introduced this Criminal Aid Bureau to realise that juveniles quite Code; it is trying to restore its reputation clearly know that there is little likelihood of their because year after year, budget after budget being caught and that, if they are caught, for six years it has failed. The people have nothing is going to happen to them. The experienced that failure. They know that this is biggest problem that police have is that, faced the last desperate attempt by this dying with the need for detection and rehabilitation, Government to show that it has some tough under this Government there are no deterrents measures to deal with law and order or that it whatsoever. can pull a rabbit out of the hat in order to suddenly stop the significant increase in crime The last card in the pack is the Corrective that we have seen under this Government. Services Act, which specifies that parole may be granted when criminals have served half There was no need for such a massive their sentences. It also provides for remissions change to the Criminal Code. Such codes are for no reason, working weekends for good designed to stand the test of time and to be behaviour, etc. In the combination of all these amended as the years go by as particular Acts we see the soft approach of the Goss cases arise. Earlier, a Government member Government. Tragically, we are seeing in our asked about computer crime. Laws relating to communities an ever-increasing number of offences of that type could have been crimes, particularly property crime and home introduced by an amending Bill. One invasion. Government member was very proud of the fact that it had taken four years to get this far, I refer to an article in the Courier-Mail on but after four years all we have is a document 29 April written by John Wright, who referred to that everybody from the former chairman of a survey taken in Toowoomba and said— the CJC, who did the original draft, to eminent "Ask the people of Toowoomba: lawyers, barristers and QCs throughout the police surveys in the city in 1993 and land are criticising. This Criminal Code is an 1994 showed a considerable jump in the absolute mess, and it has been introduced 12 months in the number of residents only because there is an election looming; it who felt at risk of being victims of serious will be trotted out every day to try to cover up crime, including assault or worse." all of the failings of the Goss Government. He went on to say— Because of the way in which this legislation has been put together, some of the "In that 12-month period between errors in it are typical of what has happened in the two Toowoomba surveys, there was the Justice Department. We have seen this no statistically significant increase in the many times. We saw it with the provisions for general level of crime in the city. Commissioners for Declarations, which were Residential burglaries and car thefts were Legislative Assembly 12687 15 June 1995

up, but there was little or no increase in 'mercy killing'. Whatever term is used, the reported crimes against the person." result is the same—a killing. Under this Government we have seen a The Northern Territory Legislature massive increase in property crime: vandalism, has passed a Bill which enables the killing breaking and entering of houses, and a new of terminally-ill patients, in certain type of crime in provincial cities whereby circumstances. However strictly the people just walk in the front door of a house guidelines are drawn and the conditions while people are out in the backyard. That laid down, it is inevitable that, in many article went on to say— cases, the patient while consenting "That certain crimes such as vehicle nominally, in reality, would prefer not be theft and break-and-enters have been killed. increasing steadily in Queensland is not in The Attorney-General for dispute. The depressing evidence is clear Queensland has issued a press in both police statistics and regular crime statement headed: 'Medical Treatment for victim surveys. Patients Now More Certain'. In the In the 10 years between 1983 and opening paragraph, he is reported as 1993, the number of households burgled saying that the new Criminal Code will or subjected to attempted break-and- allow terminally ill patients in extreme pain enter in a 12-month period went up from to legally die with dignity. At first glance 5.8 per cent to 7.5 per cent. In the this might be thought to legalise mercy process, Queensland overtook both New killing, as 'dying with dignity' is the catch South Wales and Victoria on the break- phrase of those in favour of 'mercy' killing. and-enter risk table, and now has one of However, what the Attorney is trying to the worst records in the country." say is that it will now be lawful to administer pain relieving treatment to What a record to go to an election with! It is no terminally ill patients even if there is a risk wonder that the Government has rushed in of death. If he is correct in his this Criminal Code—unfinished, unprepared assumption, there is nothing legally or and subject to criticism. It has rushed it in just morally wrong with that situation. The before an election as some sort of ploy to try crucial factor is the intention with which to say that, after six years, it suddenly realises the treatment is given; the relief of pain or that it has been a failure and is going to do to end a life. something about it. The present Criminal Code does not I intend to speak tonight on clause 82. A specifically deal with euthanasia. What it number of members have spoken about this does do is to provide for unlawful killing. A clause, because concern has been expressed person who causes the death of another that it may allow euthanasia via the back door. person, directly or indirectly, by any The material that was tabled by the means is deemed to have killed that other Attorney-General under Standing Order 241C person. There are some legal relates to this clause. After four years, that is a justifications, e.g. self-defence, which are sloppy way of presenting a clause on such a not relevant here. A doctor or nurse who sensitive and important subject. After four causes the death of a patient with intent years of reports and investigations and to cause that death, can be guilty of goodness knows how many different people murder or manslaughter according to the being involved in the process, on the very day circumstances. It is immaterial that the that this Bill is debated the Attorney-General patient consented. The Code also makes had to table that document under Standing aiding in a suicide an offence. Hence, Order 241C and, using the Acts Interpretation under the existing Code, euthanasia is Act, tried to bolster up the poor interpretation unlawful and, therefore, criminal. of clause 82. The proposed Criminal Code I shall read some extracts from an article substantially repeals the existing by Denis Galligan, QC, regarding euthanasia provisions with one exception. Under the in Queensland. He said— present Code, it is lawful to have surgical "Euthanasia is a Greek word operations reasonably carried out where it meaning 'easy death'. In an age where it is for the patient's benefit (Section 282). is not considered nice to face up to reality, In the Draft, this section is repeated in refuge is taken in euphemisms or soft Clause 82 which has added to the words sounding terms. In the case of 'surgical operations' the term 'medical euthanasia, the substitute is the phrase treatment'. This term 'medical treatment' 15 June 1995 12688 Legislative Assembly

is defined as including pain relief or I turn now to a very important principle of withdrawing medical treatment. the Criminal Code, and that is the principle The Attorney-General states that the that no-one is above the law. Yet here in inclusion of these terms is to put to rest Queensland we have seen someone above any criminal responsibility for the the law, someone flout the law, and this Goss administration of treatment to relieve pain, Government has done nothing about it, where death might result. It may be despite repeated calls for inquiries and investigations. I refer to Dr Grundmann and doubted whether, under the present law, the exposure in this Parliament on two liability would result if the sole purpose of occasions of the abortions that he has the treatment was to relieve pain and not undertaken and the abortions that he said he to cause death. In the case of the giving has undertaken in the lecture that he gave in of medication etc., no real problem arises Melbourne. Those abortions were performed by virtue of the inclusion of 'medical on babies of over 20 weeks' gestation by the treatment' in the proposed new Section. cranial decompression method. In the case of withdrawal of treatment, more difficulty arises. The aspects of this Criminal Code which relate to the matter of abortion are important. Legally and morally, there is nothing The previous Criminal Code contained a wrong in ceasing treatment which is not number of sections which related to abortion having any beneficial effect other than to such as section 291, which is now section 97; prolong a life that, for practical purposes, section 292, which is now section 98; and has ceased or is about to cease and section 294, which is now section 100. The where there is no hope of reversing the effect of those three sections—that is, 291, dying process. A classic case is a person 292 and 294 of the original Code—when they in a coma whose bodily functions are are read together is that abortion does not almost non-existent and where a flicker of amount to unlawful killing if the life of the life is maintained by some mechanical or foetus is terminated prior to its birth, even if other means. In such a case, the the foetus would be capable of independent withdrawal of 'medical treatment' is not existence if it were born. The termination of only justified but is, in a real sense, the life of a foetus is covered by section 313 of merciful. the original Criminal Code and under this new The main problem with the new draft Code becomes section 109. That section in provision is that it leaves some aspects in the original Code reads— doubt, particularly in respect of a "Any person who, when a woman is 'withdrawal'. There is no attempt to define about to be delivered of a child, prevents the circumstances when treatment can be the child from being born alive by any act withdrawn nor to specify the vital aspect of or omission of such a nature that, if the 'intention'. A further problem is that it is child had been born alive and had then included in the Section dealing with died, he would be deemed to have surgical operations for 'the benefit' of the unlawfully killed the child, is guilty of a person concerned. It is not beyond the crime, and is liable to imprisonment with possibility that a court could, in this hard labour for life. enlightened age, construe 'benefit' as Section 224 of the Criminal Code—now including a 'right to die'. After all, some section 294—sets out the period of Judges in the case of an abortion have imprisonment if someone is found guilty of extended meaning of 'the mother's life' to that crime. The defence to an abortion has include the 'quality of life'. Similarly, always been in section 282. It is now in the 'benefit' could by a parity of reasoning be section of the Code which has been discussed extended to include the 'quality of death'. broadly in this debate with respect to I would suggest that it is more euthanasia. appropriate to deal with the matter of When I said that Dr Grundmann is above medical treatment separately from the Code or the laws of the State of surgical operations. A more specific Queensland, I was referring in particular not section or sub-section could deal with only to the exposure of Dr Grundmann's 'medical treatment' in a more expanded activities in this Parliament both last year and and precise manner so as to emphasise this year but also to the recent trial in that pain relief and/or withdrawal is not Townsville in which Dr Grundmann took action done with the dominant intention to cause against a Rockhampton doctor seeking death." damages for defamation. In the course of the Legislative Assembly 12689 15 June 1995 defamation hearing brought by Dr Grundmann Police Minister now order an inquiry into this against the Rockhampton doctor, Justice doctor's practice? Or will they continue to Fryberg inspected files from Dr Grundmann's neglect the matter and allow premature babies Townsville clinic. He came to the conclusion to be brutally killed by means of this cranial that Dr Grundmann— decompression method? Is it more important ". . . has performed abortions on in the eyes of the Government to protect the numerous women at his Townsville clinic abortion-on-demand ideology of the Left Wing when there was no necessity for him to do faction or to protect 24-week-old babies from so in order to prevent serious physical or the assaults of a doctor who has been clearly psychiatric injury to the patient." denounced both by his own profession and by the Supreme Court? That means that the abortions that Dr Grundmann performs are illegal. The matter of Dr Grundmann and his activities has been exposed in this Parliament In Queensland, under the McGuire ruling on two occasions. On many occasions in this of 1986, an abortion may be lawful if the Parliament, the Attorney-General, the Premier doctor honestly believes on reasonable and the Minister for Police have been asked to grounds that the act is necessary because of make inquiries into this matter, to carry out an the danger to the woman's life or to her investigation, but there has been no action physical or mental health. But at the end of whatsoever. Petitions have been presented to that trial, the public heard a Supreme Court this Parliament from 17,000 Queenslanders judge say that this justification is lacking in Dr asking for an inquiry into the actions of Dr Grundmann's practice. His opinion of the legal Grundmann and his late-term abortions. But credibility of the doctor was stated quite what have we seen from the Goss plainly, and I quote— Government? Absolutely nothing! We have "I disbelieve Dr Grundmann's seen a Supreme Court judge, in giving his assertions that he honestly and sincerely decision in that civil case, stating quite clearly applied that test before each and every that Dr Grundmann has broken the law. He is abortion which he performed." above the law, is continuing to be above the Dr Grundmann's late abortions are brutal law, and yet tonight we pontificate and talk and illegal and the reason that Justice Fryberg about the Criminal Code and what that Code did not turn the spotlight of the law onto Dr will do. Grundmann directly is that Dr Grundmann was What is the use of this Criminal Code with not on trial and the case involved a case of its 400-plus clauses if one person can be defamation against him. However, Justice above the law, if one person can flout the law? Fryberg wrote— Despite the actions of this Parliament, despite "I make no finding as to whether Dr the actions or the words of a Supreme Court Grundmann has carried out illegal judge and despite tens of thousands of abortions at his clinic at Townsville Queenslanders signing a petition and because that would require a detailed presenting it to this Parliament, we see this examination of the provisions of s 282 of person continue to flout the law. This weak- the Criminal Code. In my judgement, it kneed Government has not taken any action would be quite inappropriate for me to against this doctor. Despite all the evidence embark upon such an examination in the and despite the public outrage at what this present context, when it is unnecessary doctor has been doing, this Government has for me to do so for the purposes of the sat on its hands. decision. However, I do find that the In the light of the judge's comments, the plaintiff has performed abortions on Government must initiate criminal proceedings numerous women at his Townsville clinic against this doctor. Let Dr Grundmann show a when there was no necessity for him to do jury of Queenslanders why his killing of so in order to prevent serious physical or premature babies by cranial decompression— psychiatric injury to the patient. I this form of violence—is reasonable and disbelieve Dr Grundmann's assertions that decent and deserving of the fees that he has he honestly and sincerely applied that test charged. All that we have seen so far is a before each and every abortion which he Government that has ignored the opinions of performed. I make this finding with no Dr Peter Bayliss, the AMA, those 17,000 doubt." petitioners and even the speeches that have This Supreme Court finding must be been made in this Parliament. It makes a acted upon by the Government if the mockery of the Criminal Code that something Parliament and the rule of law is to be so obvious can be neglected. respected in this State. Will the Premier or his Time expired. 15 June 1995 12690 Legislative Assembly

Mr MALONE (Mirani) (10.19 p.m.): It do so, but I am sure that the average person gives me pleasure to rise to speak on the in the street could not; yet that is what the Bill Criminal Code. Honourable members would is supposed to address. I could quote plenty have to wonder: why all the panic to introduce of other provisions in the Bill that are just as this Bill after six years of delays in regard to it? difficult to understand. In light of the amount I have been a member of this Parliament for of time that it has taken for this legislation to only a short period, but it would appear that come before the House, one would have even as recently as the last few months a thought that those instances would have been document was tabled which was quite different addressed. We are supposed to be breaking from the one that honourable members are new ground with this Bill, but it seems to me debating tonight. Changes are occurring even that we are ploughing the same paddock— as we sit in this Chamber tonight. and it is not the back paddock. It is also a matter of concern that the One of the major changes that has been complementary Acts that have to be put in promoted in this legislation—and I would place to make this Code work will not be certainly be supportive of the Bill if it were the introduced for quite some time. It could be case—is that it makes the Criminal Code another couple of years, or at least another tougher. We have heard all the rhetoric in that year, before we see this Code actually in regard. This legislation is supposed to be the operation. I have been listening to the be-all and end-all. In my electorate, and I am speeches of Government members, and it sure right throughout Queensland, police are was rather disconcerting to hear quite a crying out for a Criminal Code that allows them number of them addressing their concerns to to take the names and addresses of people what the National Party Government did over loitering in the street. I have been right 32 years rather than promoting and supporting through the Code—and I would be only too the introduction of the new Code. One would happy to hear some comment on this have thought that there would be strong matter—but I do not believe that it addresses support for this new Code and that all the that deficiency. In my electorate, and I am speakers from the Government side would be certain right throughout Queensland, the sure to reinforce the difference between the police are having problems because they new legislation and the existing legislation. It is cannot move into groups of young people, or rather interesting that we are not really even older people, who are loitering or causing debating the subject at all, but really criticising trouble in the street, and take their names and the National Party Government for its inaction addresses and even take them home. in not changing the legislation during its period Mr McElligott: The Juvenile Justice Act. of Government. It seems to me that we had 32 years of National Party Government and it Mr MALONE: Okay—I have been has taken six years for the Labor Government talking to police officers in my electorate and to actually do something about it. they tell me that that is not case. They tell me A lot has been said about the fact that that they cannot do anything. this legislation is going to be far simpler and Mr Szczerbanik: I thought you didn't easier to read and understand than the older have any police in your area. legislation. Certainly, my reading of it shows Mr MALONE: We do have one or two. that not to be the case. Clause 10 on page On the weekend, an incident occurred at a 27, which relates to previous convictions or local beach when a number of youths were acquittals, states— creating havoc and the police were unable to "It is a defence to a charge of an do anything about it. We need a Code that will offence (the 'current' charge and offence) ensure that they can do something about to show that the charged person has such incidents. I have the greatest admiration already been tried, and convicted or for the police officers in my electorate and acquitted on— throughout Queensland for the work that they (a) a charge on which the person could do, but we need some substantial legislation have been convicted of the current that will enable them to deal with those sorts offence; or of offences effectively. (b) a charge of an offence of which the I am concerned about a couple of person could be convicted on the clauses. Clause 134 on page 78, which relates current charge." to the dangerous operation of a vehicle, I defy anybody to pick that up, read it quickly states— and then decipher what it means. Certainly a "A person must not operate a vehicle person with legal experience may be able to dangerously in a public place. Legislative Assembly 12691 15 June 1995

Maximum penalty— (a) finds the other person at night in (a) 14 years imprisonment if— circumstances giving reasonable grounds for believing the other (i) the person kills or does grievous person is committing the offence . . ." bodily harm to anyone else; and I believe that this could be rather dangerous. It (ii) the concentration of alcohol in mentions the fact that a person may arrest the person's blood is at least someone without a warrant. This provision 150 mg of alcohol per 100 ml of could be abused at times by an overbearing blood". civilian arresting persons for offences and then The problem that I have with that subclause is bringing them to police stations to be locked the fact that there is no mention of drugs in up. That could leave them open to civil that 14-year penalty. Part (b) states— actions. The current Criminal Code contains a similar provision, but does not go quite so far. "10 years imprisonment, if the In these litigious days, I wonder where the person— police and civilians would stand if they had (i) kills or does grievous bodily wrongly arrested another civilian. harm to anyone else; I support the comments of the members (ii) is adversely affected by an for Cunningham and Barambah about cattle intoxicating substance". duffing and the operation of the Stock Squad. A large number of people in my electorate are Perhaps the Attorney-General would consider involved in the cattle industry and they are that, instead of the clause "is adversely very concerned that the offences about which affected by an intoxicating substance", the I have just spoken have been removed from appropriate wording would be "has an their special section and are treated basically intoxicating substance in his or her body." In a as stealing. recent court case in Mackay concerning a person charged with dangerous driving There must also be a great amount of causing death, the magistrate would not allow concern about the number of new clauses that evidence of the person having an intoxicating are contained in the Bill which will have to be substance in his body because he claimed tested in a court of law. I am sure that this will that no expert in Australia could measure the create quite an area of doubt and high costs amount of intoxicating substance in a body by to defendants. way of blood sample. The changed wording Mr QUINN (Merrimac) (10.29 p.m.): would eliminate the necessity to prove the When legislation is opposed by the Law amount. Society, the Bar Association, the Legal Aid Another clause that concerns me is on Commission and the Criminal Law Association, page 176. Clause 306 (2) and (3)—— not to mention any number of highly respected legal practitioners and academics, it Mr McElligott: You are not supposed to ought to set alarm bells ringing in the debate the particular clauses. Government. Such is the arrogance and Mr MALONE: I refer to the fact that we ineptness of this Government and its should be trying to come to some Attorney-General that it dismisses those claims understanding and I think that we should be and criticisms as baseless. It is desperate to talking about how we can improve the be seen to be doing something politically to legislation. stop the alarming incidence of crime in our society over which it has presided. In fact, it is Mr McElligott: That comes in so desperate that it is willing to enshrine in law Committee. a second-rate piece of legislation that will Mr MALONE: I take the honourable affect the freedom and liberties of its own member's word for it. Clause 306—Power to citizenry. arrest without warrant—states— The abolition of an accused's right to a "(1) This section applies to an trial by jury for a wide range of offences is a offence for which an offender may be change that ought to be opposed to the end. arrested without warrant generally. The Government received specialist advice that this provision should be retained. (2) A person may arrest anyone However, it chose to ignore that advice. No without warrant if the person finds the other person committing the offence. reason has been offered for the dramatic departure from this well-established principle. (3) A person may arrest anyone The idea that a Government official can without warrant if the person— determine the personal liberty or otherwise of 15 June 1995 12692 Legislative Assembly a citizen is anathema to those who live in a years later in December 1994, a revision of free democracy. The right to a trial by jury for that Code was issued for public comment. At people charged with a criminal offence has that stage, this Government allowed only two been the cornerstone of the criminal justice months for public comment on this vitally system in this State for almost 100 years, and important piece of legislation. That alone is a that right ought not be sacrificed for political complete farce. In April 1995, one month after posturing or as a cost-saving measure, as the close of that two-month period of public some people now suspect. A trial by jury of 12 input into laws that will govern the actions of all citizens is seen as fair, and it enjoys the peoples in this State, yet another redraft of the utmost public confidence. Replacing such a Code appeared on the table of the House. Mr well-respected system with the Government's Rob O'Regan, who headed the committee proposal puts this public confidence in our requested by the Attorney-General to review criminal justice system at risk. On that basis, I the Criminal Code, has criticised the oppose the Bill. unexplained introduction of new offences, new Mr ROWELL (Hinchinbrook) legal processes and a random increase in (10.32 p.m.): I rise to speak to the forced penalties which, he said, signalled a tougher changes to the criminal law in Queensland by approach to law and order, but not a reduction this short-lived Labor Government. The in crime. changes proposed by the Labor Government, However, what was tabled in April is a and in particular by the Attorney-General, will somewhat different document from that which effectively destroy the line of the Griffith Code, is currently before the House. I must ask the which has served the State for almost 100 Attorney-General: is he actually satisfied with years. what is currently before the House? It is Mr Beattie: Is that the end of your blatantly obvious that the current document is speech as well? far different in form from the 1992 document. Mr ROWELL: Just wait, the member will This Bill has initiated a wide degree of not be disappointed. The Attorney-General controversy throughout the legal fraternity, with had the wisdom to stand in this place and aspects of the legislation being condemned by speak about the line of the Griffith Code being many of the most eminent advocates in the preserved in this piece of legislation. With the legal profession. removal of the right to trial by jury for serious Mr Beattie: That's not true. I didn't offences, how will the line of the Griffith Code agree with that. be preserved? How will the line of the Griffith Mr ROWELL: The member drives a Code be preserved through the complete Saab, yet professes to be a Labor Party rewording of the entire Code? person. What an absolute disgrace! What this Labor Government has This Bill erodes one of the most intrinsic accomplished is to actually weaken the parts of the criminal justice system—the jury criminal law in this State. Through the system. That system has been the interpretation of the Code by skilful and cornerstone of the rights and privileges of learned counsel, new defences in a variety of people to be judged by their peers. Any sections will ultimately be forged. As each and attempt to take away that right should be every section is opened up to legal test, there opposed most vehemently and condemned will be massive inconsistencies and out of hand. Under clause 320 of the uncertainties in the criminal law of this State. proposed Criminal Code, a magistrate would The Government has been very coy have the right to decide whether a person about the preparation of this new Code. Over charged with an indictable offence was entitled the past five years, there have been many to a jury trial. In the past, a person accused of drafts and rewrites of this document. However, an indictable offence was allowed a trial by a it is unfortunate that the legislation that jury made up of people in the wider appears in this House today bears little community, and had the right to not be judged resemblance to what was presented to the by a magistrate or a judge. One of the main Attorney-General in 1992. For five years now, reasons for departing from this fair and proven the draft Code has been in the system has been to gain more convictions and Attorney-General's back pocket. Over this boost the Government's stocks for being period, it has always reappeared for some tough on crime. It is just a pure political ploy. It well-timed media event. is not going to be that simple. It is difficult to In 1990, a preliminary committee understand, with the strong weight of public reported, and in June 1992, that committee opinion against the Code, why the presented a draft Code of high quality. Two Government persists with the introduction of Legislative Assembly 12693 15 June 1995 this legislation. This process has been tinkered ". . . not only in Innisfail, but all up and around with for five years, and the Minister has down the State, people are expressing made a mess of it. concerns about rampant break and enters On 15 May this year, the Queensland and crimes of violence. For so many Law Society was reported in the Townsville people to speak out, something must be Bulletin as stating that it was seriously wrong. concerned about a number of proposals in the Listening to radio and television news draft and, although some of its concerns had and reading newspapers, it certainly been diminished by changes to the proposed appears to me that something is out of laws, the proposal to remove a defendant's kilter. rights to choose a trial by jury was meeting The number of crimes does seem to widespread criticism. The President of the Law have risen sharply during the last decade Society, Justin O'Sullivan, said that he was and not in proportion to population surprised and disturbed by the proposed growth. changes. The Queensland Council for Civil Liberties has weighed in with similar concerns . . . we have had to deal with three about the rights of a citizen being overruled by robbers in the past 12 years so we view a magistrate if the defendant's choice was to the current rise in lawlessness with alarm. have a trial by jury. . . . it is frequently noted that the majority Throughout my electorate, there is of break and enter crimes are perpetrated widespread concern about the number of by young people and quite often that offences that are occurring. On Monday, 29 these young people are suffering from August last year, more than 30 business drug dependence, as if those two factors people attended a meeting in Innisfail at Alan are mitigating factors in their guilt! Maruff House to hear speakers at a Business I strongly believe that those factors Crime Prevention Workshop, which was are not and that such criminals should conducted by the police and the Innisfail suffer the same punishment as any other Chamber of Commerce. Many of the people criminal on similar charges. Not only to who attended that seminar had sustained serve as a deterrent but also, if damage to their properties from break and incarcerated, to protect society from them. enters. They were absolutely fed up with the . . . a letter recently to the editor of the losses and damage that they had sustained. Innisfail Advocate proposed that more They ridiculed the current laws and were police would help curb the rise in concerned about the Government's attitude to lawlessness. I agree that would be so, offences perpetrated by people who had no especially police 'on the beat'. regard for other people's rights and property. . . . The police and security personnel made them aware of the manner in which criminals I view with alarm the numerous operate. A video was shown of how to treat instances of wrongdoers being sentenced armed robbers. Methods of legally safe ways too lightly. I believe a breakdown in the of dealing with burglars were discussed. The judicial system is imminent when criminals matter of insurance was also raised, as some (irrespective of their ages) are jailed but people had had their shop windows broken then promptly released on parole or worse and goods stolen on more than one occasion. have their sentences quashed on appeal There was a strong level of contempt shown to another authority. for people who nonchalantly had no regard for Senior police officers travelling the a person's property. country seeking to re-assure people and During the middle of last year, in quoting lists of crime statistics do little to conjunction with the Chamber of Commerce, win my confidence. Industry and Tourism in Innisfail, I carried out a I think the deeper problem lies with survey on law and order issues. The greater the people who are responsible for proportion of the respondents to that survey enacting the country's legislation and did not think the State Government was doing laws." enough to prevent crime. Of the many people The tempo of break and enters is who responded, not one stated that law and increasing. Towards the end of last year, the order was not of major concern. I would like to small town of Mourilyan, just south of Innisfail, read out very quickly a comment that was had four break and enters in the one night. made by a person who responded to the Nothing is sacred anymore. The burglars even survey. That respondent stated— broke into the Catholic church, leaving 15 June 1995 12694 Legislative Assembly residents bewildered. The constable based at Insufficient time has been allowed for Mourilyan thought that the town had been those involved with the workings of the targeted by criminal elements from Cairns. Criminal Code to come to grips with its The superficial "get tough" rhetoric in this ramifications. I have spoken to a police legislation has no substance. One of our main prosecutor who said that the changes were problems concerns the provision of the not entirely warranted and that it would have penalties and sentences legislation that been simpler to have amended the existing means that offenders are sent to jail only as a Code where necessary. Although the Attorney- last resort. This airy-fairy attitude to those who General carries on about plain English, this wilfully flaunt the system needs to be document is written in anything but that. With strengthened. These offenders know full well the complexities of the Criminal Code, it will that they are dealing with laws that have gone require some time for all those who have to soft even if a conviction is successfully work with the new format to become recorded against them. accustomed to the changes. This will be time consuming and possibly of little benefit to the A ridiculous situation prevailed with legal final outcome of cases that come under its aid in an Innisfail District Court case last year. provisions. Although a number of drafts have The magistrate accused the Legal Aid Office been in circulation, generally people involved of behaving in a manner of bureaucracy gone with this aspect of justice have not been given mad. The bean counters at Legal Aid in an opportunity to evaluate the Criminal Code Brisbane cost taxpayers $5,000. That was the now being debated. amount involved in having the judge, two court reporters, a clerk, a bailiff, the Crown A dangerous situation is occurring in that prosecutor and his clerk in attendance for a magistrates are not recording convictions for day's sitting, while the Legal Aid Office tried to those convicted of drug-related offences. The get a $1,260 contribution from a man who system is not breaking down so much with earned $300 a week. The man concerned, respect to maximum penalties but with respect who was accused of one count of unlawful to the minimum penalties imposed on wounding and three counts of indecent offenders. It is the province of the Government dealing, was a banana worker who had no to direct judges and magistrates to administer savings to speak of and would have had to discipline. If, due to the use of precedents, it is save money over time to pay for legal perceived that those who are offending are representation. The judge had discussed the able to ride a horse and cart through the cost with the Cairns barrister who had applied system, it is then up to the Government of the for legal aid after the committal trial but who day to rectify that. Such rectification has was told by Legal Aid that the accused had to definitely not occurred under this Government. make a contribution of $1,260. The barrister In fact, through the reduction of minimum and the judge discussed the cost for a penalties, the reverse has happened. sentence and arrived at a figure of $750, yet Criminals are confident about being able to Legal Aid insisted on $1,260. The accused rort the system. Nowhere is this more evident was willing to plead guilty to the unlawful than in the penalties and sentences wounding charges, but the problem of the legislation. There is a general lack of accused representing himself on the indecent deterrents strong enough to persuade the dealing charges had to be overcome. intending perpetrators of crime that the consequences of their actions will make the Government members interjected. committing of the offence not worth while. The Mr ROWELL: I like it; Government Criminal Code has no real substance when it members should keep their interjections going. comes to protecting the man in the street against those who are determined to invade Since the accused could not find the his right as a citizen of Queensland. $1,260 needed for representation, he was unable to engage the services of the barrister. I turn to the issue of euthanasia. Clause It would not have been desirable for the 82 of the proposed Criminal Code is of accused to question the complainants of the concern. Although the Minister tried to defend indecent dealing offences personally. The cost the position relating to the prospects of incurred to the taxpayers was in the vicinity of euthanasia occurring as a result of clause 82, $5,000 for a day that turned out to be totally quite clearly he has not allayed fears about unproductive. that happening. The community is divided on euthanasia, and there is a wide range of Mr Beattie interjected. opinions on the subject. I am not prepared to Mr ROWELL: The honourable member condone any aspect of law that could be with the Saab should slow down. judged as taking a life. There are extreme Legislative Assembly 12695 15 June 1995 circumstances, for example, when a medical Mr SPRINGBORG (Warwick) aid or a drug ought to be used to assist a (10.52 p.m.): The second-reading speech of person whose quality of life is at its lowest ebb. the Honourable the Attorney-General is full of However, there is a crying need for such a his attempts to project himself into the history provision to be clearly spelt out. But in this books alongside philosophers such as instance the legislation lacks definition. Aristotle, Plato and Archimedes. The speech is Despite the Minister's utterances on palliative packed with esoteric language in a feeble care, no clear intention is enunciated in clause attempt to cover up some of the very real 82 of this Bill as to providing medical treatment deficiencies contained in the proposed Code. I and withdrawing medical treatment. Why is the will be opposing the passage of the proposed clause so vague? It could have been better new Criminal Code. I believe that a couple of drafted. The basic provenance of my concern aspects of the Code are worthy of support, but is that at no time during treatment should a not in their present form. patient be faced with the prospect that any During this debate, much has been made action taken by another could be construed as of the inadequacies of the new Code and the causing death. inadequacies of the consultation process A couple of years ago, a 17-year-old boy undertaken in relation to it as highlighted by was found murdered in Innisfail and, after the Law Society, the Bar Association and the extensive investigations by the police, a Civil Liberties Association. The Opposition suspect was apprehended. The suspect was contends that, if such problems are evident involved only a year before in a stabbing and are being highlighted by such eminent incident with another resident of Innisfail and people as Rob O'Regan, the former Chairman was allowed to plea bargain down an of the Criminal Justice Commission, then the attempted murder charge to one of unlawful proposed new Code should be reconsidered. wounding without the knowledge of As Chairman of the Parliamentary Criminal investigating officers, who were shocked and Justice Commission, Mr Davies should be disgusted when they were informed of that. aware that those people do not talk lightly. There was a body bag and a rope in the boot Over the last week and in the months of this person's car, but the judiciary decided prior to that, the inadequacies of the proposed to reduce the attempted murder charge to one new Code have been littered throughout all of unlawful wounding. That is an absolute major newspapers in this State and this disgrace. I think the honourable member for country in the form of letters and major articles Brisbane Central would agree with me. by respected commentators and by respected Had that charge not been reduced, there legal practitioners. I want to read one of those is little doubt that that 17-year-old boy would letters to reinforce this point and perhaps a be alive today. The suspect charged with the couple of other articles which may not have 17-year-old boy's murder was eventually been touched on during this debate. The letter convicted and a life sentence was imposed. to which I want to refer in particular was written Under this Government's soft attitude to crime, by Eric Colvin, professor of law at the Bond the murderer will be requested to leave the University. It states— comforts of a gaol cell in seven years or "One of the objectives in having a sooner. What crime does one have to commit code is to make the criminal law against humanity to be justly penalised by the reasonably accessible to the general "go soft on crime" attitude of this State community. The Attorney-General has Government? recognised this in his public statements I am extremely concerned with many about the use of 'plain English' in the new provisions of the proposed new Code. The code. It is disappointing, therefore, that Government must adopt a realistic attitude. It the draft contains so many gaps and certainly has not done so with the proposed obscurities. new Code. The Minister is a legend in his own Various examples can be given. The mind. We should reassess the contents of the rule that the prosecution must ordinarily proposed new Code, and I am confident that prove its case beyond reasonable doubt a coalition Government will do exactly that. is missing. The term 'intent' is undefined. This Code will create horrendous headaches The central provisions on criminal for the legal profession. It will set precedents responsibility will be comprehensible only that will be extremely difficult to overturn. to trained lawyers." Under the new Code, the legal system of this State will encounter wide-ranging problems. I agree with the comments of the honourable member for Hinchinbrook, who stated that the Time expired. new Criminal Code will be continually 15 June 1995 12696 Legislative Assembly contested in the courts and in the Appeal essential points during my contribution. I find Courts. This is a completely new Criminal that, once I am distracted by a few Code. There was nothing wrong with the old interjections, I have some degree of difficulty Code. Of course we must move with the times, in covering the points that I wanted to make. I but that does not mean throwing out the baby do not want to miss any vital points. with the bathwater. I believe that our society has never We need to consider the fundamental addressed the cultural element. In a number issue of this debate, that is, crime. We have to of Asian countries, in various European examine the causes of crime and the countries and in various other cultures around measures that deter criminal activity. In my the world, different types of crimes are view, the proposed new Code does not prevalent. In the past, we have not studied address those fundamental issues. It is the those societies and asked why fewer sexual role of this Parliament to make the laws, and assaults and rapes occur in places like Japan. those laws by and large must reflect the We have not considered the reasons behind standards held by the general community. No the law and order situation in Singapore and doubt the Code goes some way towards that why crime is so prevalent in the United States. end, but in my view it does not go all the way. The issue is wider than gun laws. I believe that When people break the law, they breach the a constitutional element is a factor in the standards reflected in the Criminal Code as equation. For instance, the people of the laid down by the legislators of this Parliament. United States take many of their liberties a When Sir Samuel Griffith introduced the little too far. As legislators, we should study the original Code, he was basically reflecting the legal systems of various cultures and take the standards which society held at that time. The best features from each in order to address Queensland Criminal Code was held up as a our own problems. model to be followed by others in Australia We should be considering tougher and throughout the world. penalties. No doubt exists that rehabilitation is The causes of crime have been debated very important. However, we need not for time immemorial, and they will continue to overlook punishment. I believe that any be debated in the future. Nobody has the rehabilitation program needs to include a perfect solution, but we should be considering certain degree of punishment. If one mentions the issues of poverty and unemployment. punishment in connection with rehabilitation, Those two factors certainly play a large role in certain groups—including civil libertarians and the crime equation. The lack of respect for the politically correct—jump down one's throat authority is another important matter. Over the and claim that that is not addressing the past 10 or 20 years, our society has not been problem. successful in engendering respect into young There is no doubt that the proposed new people in particular. When we talk about Code is more about tough talk for the election rights, we also need to talk about than it is about being tough on crime. We responsibilities. Insufficient attention is focused should never accept the assertion that the on people's responsibilities. By and large, increase in crime is merely a phenomena people respect the rights of others. If people occurring in our society. The increasing crime act in a responsible manner and do not rates are often dismissed with claims that they constantly harp on about their rights, then their have been rising for some time. Some people rights will naturally follow. claim that we will never reverse that trend and In considering the causes of crime, it must that we should make the best of it. In my view, be recognised that there are a number of that is a cop-out. The increase in crime is an depraved individuals within our society for issue that we as legislators have failed to whom rehabilitation will serve no purpose. That address and one which we must address by is illustrated by the number of recidivists in our genuinely getting tougher and educating gaols. Another cause of crime is inadequate people at a young age about their laws. As well, there is a certain cultural responsibilities. We must tip the balance away element which we as a society have not faced from the rights of people and more towards up to. their responsibilities. Mr Davies: Have you heard of the Ten Over the past few years, we have tended Commandments? to concern ourselves too much with the rights Mr SPRINGBORG: I certainly have, but of the criminal and not with the rights of the I will take interjections later in my contribution. I victim. The victims are the people who will have only 15 minutes remaining in which to carry the scars of crime right throughout their speak. I would like to canvass a number of life. There is no sense in honourable members Legislative Assembly 12697 15 June 1995 standing up here and saying, "The poor of break and enter offences in that police criminal, they were badly toilet trained", or district has gone up by 50 per cent. Recently, whatever the case may be. Many offenders the town held a law and order public meeting make conscious decisions to commit crime. at which many people in the community Far too often, we cop out and make excuses resolved that the community could do a lot for those people, all the while failing to more to help solve the crime problem. There is address the fact that these people do what no doubt about the fact that we need tougher they do because they like it and for absolutely laws which adequately reflect community no other reason. We need to concern standards, but communities also need to do ourselves with the rights of victims. more themselves. I believe that a lot more consideration Many people stand back because they do could be given to the area of criminal not want to get involved. They stand back and compensation. I would like to see those who say, "If I get involved, there may very well be commit personal and property crime not only retributions." We need to encourage those having to serve the sentence handed down by people to get involved in reporting crime. I the courts, whether it be a gaol term, know that there are facilities such as community service or probation, but also Crimestoppers and Neighbourhood Watch, but having some of their property taken off them. a lot of people do not want to get involved in They should have to pay right throughout their those types of programs because they are life, or for a substantial part of their life, with scared of the consequences. material things. People who are raped or Surveillance devices play a very important bashed, or who are victims of any crime, take part in deterring crime, as do security patrols. I their scars with them right to the grave. At the do have a problem with local authorities end of the day, many criminals are able to putting in place security controls, because by dismiss their offences from their minds. They and large I believe that it is the role of the may reflect upon them occasionally—some of State Government to provide the services them may be genuinely remorseful—but for required to ensure personal and property many of those criminals, within 10 or 15 years security. the crimes that they have committed have gone from their minds. However, somebody One area of the Bill on which I would like who has been raped or bashed carries scars to comment that I believe reflects with them right to the end of their life. They contemporary concerns and is a genuine suffer in the same way that Vietnam veterans attempt to do something—— suffer with their memories right to the end of Mr Beattie: Genuine. their lives. Problems of that sort have caused Mr SPRINGBORG: You say neither, I many disruptions to some people's lives, from say neither, but whatever you say not too family breakdown to suicide. many people take much notice of. Mr Beattie: What's this got to do with Mr Beattie interjected. the Criminal Code? Mr SPRINGBORG: I notice the Mr SPRINGBORG: This is a pity. The honourable member has been rushing into honourable member for Brisbane Central this place—"Cannon Fodder" Beattie is what interjecting. I have been looking at the scar on members on his own side of the House call his forehead and I cannot work out whether it is from his frontal lobotomy or whether him. They do not necessarily like him, but they somebody tried to hit him between the eyes have been tossing him into this place during but the gap was not wide enough. the past week or so and he has been ruthlessly spraying bullets around, making a bit I want to talk about other methods of of a mark but not making any real impact helping us achieve our ambition of solving because of his inability to achieve his designs some our crime problems. This again comes of getting into Cabinet. back to the civil liberties argument. A lot more emphasis needs to be placed on surveillance I would like to refer to an article in the devices. Civil libertarians talk about the need Courier-Mail on 3 March 1995. It is headed to regulate these essential devices, but let us "Rethink call on the Criminal Code". face it, in places where they have been Mr Beattie: Who read it to you? trialled, such as Fortitude Valley and Ipswich, Mr SPRINGBORG: Actually, I will refer they have been a great success. to another article because I am not sure that I Warwick has been fortunate that, will have time to read that one. This article is generally, the level of most types of crime has titled "Early Release Scandal", and it is to do remained static, but unfortunately the number with the spreading of deadly diseases, which is 15 June 1995 12698 Legislative Assembly a matter of contemporary concern and is That sort of sentence is absolutely and totally particularly reflected in attempts by certain inadequate. The article continues— criminals to use this as a vehicle to intimidate "Lynch had already spent 1 3/4 years and to kill people. This article in the Sunday on remand awaiting trial and that time Mail on 26 March 1995 is headed "Early was taken into consideration, meaning a Release Scandal by Victim Terrified for her sentence of just one year. But take four Life." months off that for home detention Government members interjected. release and he will be out of jail on Mr SPRINGBORG: No, it is not just a November 21. beat-up, it is an article that talks about the . . . genuine concern of a young woman who Ms Paton said she fled to became the victim of a malicious attacker. This Queensland on several occasions and put is one thing that the Bill has got right, but Lynch off the track by sending letters with unfortunately the vehicle itself is flawed so I false addresses. am unable to support it. The article states— He finally found her on the Gold "The young woman victim of an Coast and attempted to persuade her to AIDS-infected attacker believes he will return to Melbourne. keep hunting until he dies or until he kills her. 'When I refused he tried to kill me. She did not catch the deadly virus He smashed the window (of a car when he bit her several times—but she she was sitting in) and dragged me out by still believes he has signed her death the hair. warrant. 'He punched me in the face. Kerrie Paton fears for her life. He was trying to knock me out. Last week the attacker was jailed for He bashed my head against the seven years. steering wheel. However, he will be free from prison He got me out of the car and started before Christmas. 'He is totally obsessed banging my head on the road.' Ms Paton with me. said that as she attempted to escape, He will stop at nothing to get me. Lynch leapt on her and sank his teeth into her skin, grinding them and spitting as he I am frightened he will try to kill me. did so. 'He bit me on the right cheek and What happens when he gets out?'. in six or seven other places on my face, Ms Paton, 30, was brutally bashed neck, stomach and back. and bitten by Michael Joseph Lynch in 'Of course he broke the skin. what was described as a 'cruel, callous There was blood pouring everywhere. and deliberate' attack. Lynch, 36, pleaded guilty in the Brisbane District Court last . . . week to two counts of assault causing She described the initial period after bodily harm, one count of unlawful the attack as very worrying. She had been wounding." tested for HIV previously, but was more Mr Beattie: The Parliamentary Library worried this time. 'There was a bit of provided this to everybody. panic. Mr SPRINGBORG: But it is one of the . . . few articles that has not been quoted. It But it was six months before I found continues— out for sure that I did not have it.' Ms "The charges arose out of an Paton said she did not know how long incident on the Gold Coast on July 25, Lynch had to live. 'He will go to any 1993, in which Lynch bit Ms Paton, his lengths to stay alive, to get out of jail. He former girlfriend, on the cheek in an will keep trying to come to me in the hope attempt to transmit the AIDS virus after of living happily ever after. 'I do not she had ended their relationship. He also understand why the judge could not see spat blood over police officers after being how much of a maniac he is. The violence locked up. Judge Brian Hoath sentenced against me was brought up in court.' " Lynch last Tuesday to seven years' As I said, I believe that this is one area of this jail—but recommended parole after just Bill which does at least attempt to address this 2 3/4 years." problem that we have been finding as the Legislative Assembly 12699 15 June 1995

AIDS epidemic continues in our community. redrafted. That is not a good reflection on the There are particularly depraved individuals who drafting of this Bill by the Attorney-General and seek to use this disease as a weapon of his department. As the Attorney-General is malice, as a weapon of intimidation and as a well aware, and as has been said so many weapon of murder or attempted murder. times, this Bill has been drafted over a number Mr Beattie: What's your point? Get it off of years and yet in many respects it is a your chest. failure. Mr SPRINGBORG: I thought that the Two areas of considerable concern have honourable member for Brisbane Central been the changes to provisions relating to an might like me at least once to say that the Bill accused person's right to choose a jury trial is going some way towards addressing a and the stock-stealing laws. However, I do not particular problem. What I am trying to say is intend to repeat what other speakers have that it is meeting a particular contemporary already said. One aspect that does worry me concern. is probably not related to this Bill to any great degree, except that it could come within the Mr Davies: Are you going to vote for it? provisions of the organised crime section. Mr SPRINGBORG: I am not going to Clause 271 on page 153 states— vote for it, because fundamentally the Bill is flawed. "A person engages in an organise crime if— Work release is another very positive area of our criminal justice system. It allows low (a) the person commits an organised security prisoners out of prison to do things in crime offence on at least 3 separate the community for their benefit and for the occasions; and"— benefit of the community. That does a great It does not say "within a year"— deal for the self-esteem of those people. By "(b) the organised crime offences form all and large I have found in my area that work- or part of a substantially planned and release prisoners have been very well organised activity carried out by the appreciated by the community as a whole and person with at least 1 other person." have done great things, for example, the work done at the Warwick showground. I believe I am fairly precise in my interpretation of this there is a pilot program under way to have a and the law, as members will appreciate, is number of female work release prisoners about preciseness. Not so long ago we had based there in the near future and they are Anzac Day, and part of the traditions of that really looking forward to that. day is playing two-up. The Attorney-General will appreciate that the playing of two-up is We need a criminal justice system which rewards people who can be rehabilitated and illegal. Indeed, not only is it illegal within which punishes people who basically cannot another Act, it would be illegal in the strict be rehabilitated or need to be effectively interpretations of this Act. Can the deterred, but by and large this Criminal Code Attorney-General give me an assurance that is deficient. It has been condemned these sorts of activities would not be covered universally by legal groups and civil liberties by this Code? Two-up was played by people groups and, as those groups say, because of serving their country at war and I do not think it the flawed consultation process it needs to be unreasonable that two-up should be allowed redrafted. to be played in RSL clubs or other organised places on Anzac Day. The police are presently Mr SLACK (Burnett) (11.11 p.m.): As put in a very embarrassing position in that they members will no doubt appreciate, arguments do not want to police the law as it stands in in this debate have been well canvassed. I am respect of the playing of two-up, but certainly if not proposing to speak for 20 minutes, which it is flouted in front of them they must. should please members opposite, but it bears noting that the Opposition has had 33 Mr Campbell: If there is a complaint, speakers against this Bill. As far as I am they have to act on it. aware, that is all the people present from the Mr SLACK: That is right, and I thank the Opposition in this Parliament. That in itself member for Bundaberg. I would appreciate says something, apart from the fact that, as the Attorney-General recognising the the previous Speaker said, the legal and civil argument in respect of this, although I guess liberties groups have expressed reservations he will not be here after a few more weeks and about this Bill. For that very reason, if for no we on this side will have to look at it. other, as the shadow Attorney-General has Irrespective of who is here, this needs to be said, this Bill should be withdrawn and looked at. 15 June 1995 12700 Legislative Assembly

Mr Wells: Irrespective of who is here, it speakers opposite. The Opposition said that will be fixed up. when one changes the language there is a Mr SLACK: I appreciate the risk of changing the law, and that is perfectly Attorney-General confirming that. The true. When one changes the language of a Attorney-General will appreciate that the statute which has been subject to judicial Opposition has spoken strongly against this interpretation for a long period of time, there is Bill, just as legal groups are against it. We always, of course, a risk that one will change have heard newspaper articles quoted ad the law. infinitum. I support the members of the However, if Opposition members believe Opposition in their opposition to this Bill before that we are throwing out the accumulated the House. wisdom of the ages and the generations by Hon. D. M. WELLS (Murrumba— translating this Criminal Code into plain Minister for Justice and Attorney-General and English, they need only look at the Minister for the Arts) (11.17 p.m.), in reply: We Explanatory Notes to the Bill. In clause after have had a very lengthy debate and, as the clause where there is no intention to change honourable member who has just spoken has the law, the explanatory notes spell out that said, every member of the Opposition has this does not change the law. I draw the spoken on this Bill. This Bill has been subject attention of members opposite to section 14B to scrutiny by the Opposition at an of the Acts Interpretation Act which says that a unprecedented level. In comparison to what court may look, for the purposes of statutory occurred 100 years ago, it is remarkable; the interpretation, at the Explanatory Notes as well Bill passed through the Parliament 100 years as the second-reading debate in order to ago with scarcely a ripple, yet now we have determine the intention of the Parliament. had a much greater degree of scrutiny. I think That liberalisation of the law contained in an that is extremely important and I welcome it. amendment to the Acts Interpretation Act moved by this Government a couple of years It is appropriate at this point in the debate ago will ensure that there will not be the kind to go back to the reasons why we are of holus-bolus throwing out of the wisdom of introducing a new Criminal Code. The first the ages and generations which honourable reason is to remove the archaisms and to members opposite fear. have a modern statute. Honourable members on the other side of the House are prepared to At the same time, the translation of the accept this. We do not need these out-of-date Criminal Code into the language of the people provisions in the Criminal Code and I thank of the late twentieth century is a translation honourable members opposite for indicating which will be extremely benign because it will their support for that part of the process. give back to the people of Queensland their own laws. To have a situation where the only The second objective is to have a modern people who clearly understand the laws are Criminal Code, not just for today but for the the lawyers is an invidious situation. The twenty-first century. When this Bill is passed lawyers are not the only people in a court we will have a Criminal Code which is aware of room; the lawyers are not the only people computers and computer viruses; we will have governed by this Code. This is a code for a Criminal Code which is aware of the complex everyone, not just the lawyers. microbiological environment that we live in; we will have a Criminal Code which is aware that In particular, it is a Code for jurors. It is there are more dangerous things that can be extremely important that jurors should left around than mechanical contrivances; and understand the meaning of the provisions we will have a Criminal Code which is capable before them. The best way to do that is to of dealing with chemicals and diseases. translate the Criminal Code into the language The third reason for introducing a new of the people. We do not need to create or to Criminal Code is to redraft the Criminal Code maintain an information-rich group and an into plain English, into the language of the information-poor group when we are dealing people of the late twentieth century, instead of with something as fundamental as the the language of the people of the late Criminal Code. We need a document that nineteenth century. everybody can pick up and read and understand. If it does come to pass in any Mr FitzGerald: You have changed it in respect, as the Opposition fears, that the an awful lot of places, too. translation of this Criminal Code into plain Mr WELLS: I take the honourable English requires amendment down the track, member's interjection and I refer to a theme then so be it. The law now has a degree of which ran through the remarks of a number of dynamism that it did not have in the old days. Legislative Assembly 12701 15 June 1995

This, of course, is the most dynamic area of a response from the people of Queensland, the law. and this Criminal Code represents the views of The old Criminal Code is the most the people of Queensland. Sure, we took amended statute on the statute book. While I advice from a committee of lawyers to begin accept what honourable members say, that with, and this Criminal Code is very largely the there is always a risk with translating the law work of the committee chaired by Rob into plain English, that is a risk which we O'Regan, QC. But in a whole range of should be prepared to take and which we respects we went ahead and changed it in should have the courage to take. We should response to the community—not to the be prepared to render the people's law in the community of lawyers but to the community of people's language and we should be prepared all of Queensland. for the exigency of amendment if an So the proposition that there was not amendment becomes necessary. There will be enough consultation is simply incorrect. This no embarrassment on this side of the House if Code has been sitting on the table of the an amendment does become necessary House for over six months now. It has been because, as I say, the law needs to be exposed to debate and discussion during the dynamic; it needs to change with the times. whole of that period. Prior to that, there was a The fourth reason that we are introducing period of years during which we were receiving a new Criminal Code is so that we can have a ideas from people all over the place. We complete overhaul of the penalties. We have advertised widely that the Code was being at the moment a Criminal Code which goes reviewed, we got input and we took it all on soft in too many areas, a Criminal Code which board. does not meet the demands of the people of Another criticism which has been made Queensland for tough laws, laws that deter was that this Code is being rushed through. and laws that respond appropriately to crime. But listening to 33 speakers is hardly rushing a Tougher penalties are not the whole solution piece of legislation through. This piece of to the problem of crime. Nobody on this side legislation has not moved up the notice paper of the House believes that tougher penalties at any unusual rate, it has moved slowly up are the whole solution to the problem of crime, the notice paper and not, if I recall, jumping but they are part of the solution. The the queue ahead of anything at all. It has Government is, by introducing a Criminal Code come on in the normal course of things after which has overall across-the-board tougher six months of exposure and five years of penalties, but tougher penalties targeted at debate. those areas where there has been a The proposition that the Code is being significant increase in crime, is responding to rushed through was run on the other side the concerns of the people of this State. together with the proposition that we have Having mentioned the four most taken too long to do it. But we make no important reasons why we need a full redraft apologies for the fact that we have given five of the Criminal Code, I would like to mention years of discussion and debate to this project; some of the themes which ran through the we make no apologies that five years have criticisms which were made by honourable been very well invested. members on the other side of the House. The The third theme which runs through first criticism was that there was not enough criticisms which honourable members opposite consultation, and that came out in the same have made has been a proposition to the breath that there were too many drafts of this effect that there should be minimum penalties Criminal Code. Can I say to honourable for certain offences. Yet that was done at the members that there were many drafts of this same time as glowing approval was given to a Criminal Code because there was a great deal remark that was quoted by a number of of consultation. The Criminal Code was speakers opposite from Rob O'Regan, QC, changed not in response to whimsy and not in when he said in the final report of the Criminal response to somebody sitting in an ivory tower Code Review Committee that mandatory redrafting it according to what occurred to penalties were obnoxious. These two things them at the time, but according to input which are inconsistent, but I think it is appropriate was received by this Government from the that we should respond at least to the community generally. suggestion by honourable members opposite We went out and we actively consulted. that there should be minimum penalties. We went out and held meetings. We received It was not very long ago that an tens of thousands of letters. We held scores of honourable member in this place called for a meetings. In the process of doing that, we got serious sanction to be brought against a local 15 June 1995 12702 Legislative Assembly councillor who had been found guilty of taking of life. This Criminal Code provides shoplifting. There was a furore from the penalties and prohibitions for the intentional Opposition benches when the honourable taking of human life. As the honourable member did that. They felt that there should member for Chermside said, the palliative care be no secondary punishment for this offence, provision does not express itself as an they felt that what had occurred in the case exception to the rule that intentional taking of was appropriate, and that the councillor should human life is prohibited. Rather, it allows the be allowed to get back to her life and get back provision of pain relief and exculpates from to her political career. So they thought that criminal responsibility anybody who, having the there should be no minimum penalty in that intention only to provide pain relief, case. But what should be the minimum nevertheless becomes the cause of a person's penalty for theft? Are honourable members death—despite the fact that they intended seriously going to suggest that we should sit only to provide that pain relief. Safeguards are down here and, with the wisdom of infallible built around that section. Those safeguards foresight, decide what the minimum penalty are that the palliative care must be provided should be for every offence? Do we have with reasonable care and skill, it must be some sort of crystal ball that we can see provided for the person's benefit, it must be in prospectively everything better than we expect good faith and, of course, a death should not the judges and the juries to see occur intentionally. retrospectively? In order to further clarify the intention of We can have two choices. We can have the Parliament, I put into the Explanatory the justice of each case decided by the judge Notes an additional page. That page said that and jury or we can have the justice of every it is not the intention of this Parliament by this case determined in advance by politicians; provision to legalise euthanasia and there is politicians who, not being omniscient, could no intention in this Parliament to diminish the not possibly know all the circumstances that force of existing prohibitions against might be involved in those cases—cases euthanasia. Again, that will be picked up by which have not come to pass. section 14B of the Acts Interpretation Act. That is why neither this jurisdiction, nor to Courts may refer to that provision in order to my knowledge any other Westminster understand the intention of the Parliament. I jurisdiction, has any minimum mandatory now make the intention of the Parliament penalties. We do have mandatory life for abundantly and translucently clear. It is not the murder. We have retained mandatory life in intention of this Parliament by this section to that respect. We make no apologies for that. legalise euthanasia, and I say: if there is any But the other proposition that there should be member of this Parliament who, by this minimum mandatory penalties is a proposition section, wishes to legalise euthanasia and which it is very difficult to make sense of wishes this Bill here and now to legalise unless somebody is prepared to stand up in euthanasia, let them now speak. Let the this House and say that the minimum penalty Hansard record show that no member of this for this offence should be such and such and House spoke. Let the Hansard record show the minimum penalty for that offence should that the intention of this Parliament is be so and so. translucently clear. The other matter that engaged Having spoken of some of the themes honourable members opposite was the which were raised in this extremely broad- question of cattle duffing. Honourable ranging and lengthy debate, I would like to members opposite were extremely concerned address one or two of the specific issues that about the question of cattle duffing. I can were raised by honourable members on the assure those honourable members that cattle other side of the House. There were, I think, duffing has not been overlooked in the new basically three issues which were the subject Criminal Code. The present Criminal Code of extensive comment by honourable actually operated as a restriction on the members opposite. I think that those were largely the only issues that were of extensive capacity of courts to hand down appropriate concern to honourable members opposite. penalties for cattle duffers. The most usable section of the Criminal Code was a section I will turn first to the clause concerning that imposed a penalty of only one year for palliative care. The clause concerning palliative cattle stealing. This new Criminal Code care is a clause about palliative care; it is not a subsumes cattle duffing into a general offence clause about euthanasia. This Parliament of stealing which, with circumstances of does not intend it to be a clause about aggravation, can carry a penalty of 14 years. euthanasia. Euthanasia is the intentional That can mean that the penalty that can be Legislative Assembly 12703 15 June 1995 handed down for cattle duffing can be 14 O'Regan draft. He said that it did not meddle times what it was in the past. Honourable too much with the principles of justice members opposite have given a lot of time established over literally hundreds of years. and attention to this question and to their Elsewhere he said that in 1992—referring to concerns and I respond specifically to their the second O'Regan draft—the Government concerns in that way. This Code gives the started off with a pretty worthwhile code. Given courts the opportunity to punish much more that the Leader of the Opposition has severely than in the past the offence of cattle indicated that we should look again at the duffing. O'Regan Code, I believe that I owe it to the The third and last major issue that was House to explain why it is that this addressed at length by honourable members Government did not proceed to legislate the opposite was the question of trial by jury. For a O'Regan draft. start, I would like to make it very clear that As a preface to that, let me say that the there are no major offences involved in the O'Regan draft forms the backbone and the provision that allow magistrates to determine substance of this Criminal Code. Nearly all of where indictable offences triable summarily will O'Regan's recommendations are incorporated be tried. There are a number of safeguards. in the Criminal Code. Nearly all of the process The most important of those is that the provisions of this Criminal Code that is before magistrate must take into account the wish of the Parliament came from the Criminal Code the person before the court to be tried in one Review Committee. But why did we move on jurisdiction in preference to another. There is from the code draft that was given to us at the capacity for the person in that case to that stage? There were a number of reasons. I appeal. What we are doing through this will give honourable members some provision is avoiding a situation in which examples. That draft did away with mandatory people are denied trial by jury; we are not life for murder and replaced it with maximum creating a situation in which people are denied life. In other words, it was a code that went the right to trial by jury. We are avoiding going soft on murderers. It did away with the offence down the track that they have gone down in of rape. That is right; it did away with the New South Wales, Victoria, the United offence of rape. I do not know how that could Kingdom and many other places. In many be explained to either the women or the men other jurisdictions, a sum of money is of Queensland, but that was what it determined, say $10,000 or maybe $5,000 in recommended. There was to be no offence of some jurisdictions, and if the value of the rape. Rather, there was to be an offence of offence is less than that sum, the sexual assault, and it would be up to the court consequence is that one does not get a to determine the seriousness of each choice. One goes straight before a magistrate; particular offence. It contained a few—very, one does not have the opportunity of trial by very few—increased sentences and some jury. diminutions of sentences. Those were not By this provision, we are allowing the what the people of Queensland were looking umpire to decide in accordance with the justice for. They were not what honourable members of the case. By this provision, we have on the other side of the House were looking ensured that anybody can get trial by jury, for. There was no offence of computer crime, provided the umpire decides that they have no offence of looting, no offence of organised grounds for having that trial by jury. All they crime in the O'Regan draft. The palliative care need to do is tell the magistrate. There is no section of the O'Regan draft was defective. fairer way of playing the game than letting the Our palliative section has three umpire decide and that is what is happening in safeguards: the requirement for reasonable this case. We are not going down the track of care and skill, that it should be for the person's those other jurisdictions that have simply, with benefit, and that it should be done in good a blanket provision, denied trial by jury to large faith—as well as, of course, the overriding numbers of people who come before them. provision that the intentional taking of life is There have been some comments from punishable under the Criminal Code as the other side of the House that perhaps we homicide. The Criminal Code Review should draft the legislation again, that perhaps Committee's palliative care section did not we should go back to the O'Regan draft, or have such safeguards. When I say that, I am that perhaps we should stay with the 1989 giving the reasons why it was necessary to version of the Criminal Code as it then was. move on from the O'Regan draft. In doing so, The honourable the Leader of the Opposition I am not criticising the work of the O'Regan said that back in 1990, it was generally a draft, which was a massive advance, and sensible document. He was referring to the which has been largely incorporated, but it was 15 June 1995 12704 Legislative Assembly not a draft that was suitable for enactment by Committee this Parliament. Hon. D. M. Wells (Murrumba—Minister for We could not stay with the present Justice and Attorney-General and Minister for Criminal Code. It is a Criminal Code that goes the Arts) in charge of the Bill. soft on break and enters. It does not contain an offence of intent to transmit a serious Clauses 1 to 9, as read agreed to. disease; there is no grievous sexual assault Clause 10— offence; it keeps the penalty for serious Mr BEANLAND (11.51 p.m.): Earlier assault at three years' imprisonment instead of during the debate I referred to clause 10. I will the seven years' imprisonment prescribed read it because I believe it highlights some of under this Code; there is no cruelty to children the problems one can experience when one offence; and it provides a penalty of only two talks about writing the Code in plain English. years' imprisonment for the offence of endangering the safety of a person in a Clause 10—Previous conviction or vehicle whereas this Code provides a much acquittal—states— more serious penalty. Indeed, the provisions "It is a defence to a charge of an of the present Criminal Code are themselves offence (the 'current' charge and offence) the reason why we need to make a change. to show that the charged person has The Government has been told that this already been tried, and convicted or Criminal Code has been criticised by the Law acquitted on— Society, the Bar Association, the Council for (a) a charge on which the person Civil Liberties, the Criminal Law Association could have been convicted of the and other lawyers. We were asked, "Who is current offence; or supporting the Bill?" The answer is: the people of Queensland. In introducing this Bill, the (b) a charge of an offence of which Government is addressing a deeply felt the person could be convicted on the concern and a deeply felt need of the people current charge." of this State. The Government is responding Section 17 of the current Criminal Code— to the people's wish by giving them a new Former conviction or acquittal—states— Criminal Code which is tough but fair. "It is a defence to a charge of any We have been told that we should go offence to show that the accused person back to this draft or that draft. We have been has already been tried, and convicted or told that we should amend the Criminal Code acquitted upon an indictment on which he instead of redrafting it. However, there is a might have been convicted of the offence time for amendment and there is a time for with which he is charged, or has already rewriting; there is a time for temporising and been acquitted upon indictment, or has there is a time for making decisions. There is a time in the evolution of every society when its already been convicted, of an offence of legislators owe to those whom they represent which he might be convicted upon the the benefit of a full review of their fundamental indictment or complaint on which he is laws. When 100 years has gone by since the charged." introduction of the Criminal Code, that time I will let the members of the public judge has surely arrived—the time for making a for themselves which language in which Code decision, however hard. This is the time and they can follow best. However, it is quite clear this is the decision. to me that this new plain English Code is far Question—That the Bill be now read a more complex and complicated than the second time—put; and the House divided— current Criminal Code. In fact, I could not AYES, 44—Ardill, Barton, Beattie, Bennett, Bird, believe the gobbledegook contained in this Braddy, Bredhauer, Briskey, Burns, Campbell, Clark, particular clause. It proves that the D’Arcy, Davies, Dollin, Edmond, Elder, Fenlon, Foley, Government can still get tied up in the Gibbs, Hamill, Hayward, Hollis, McElligott, McGrady, language. The Attorney-General can make all Mackenroth, Nunn, Nuttall, Palaszczuk, Pearce, Pitt, the claims in the world—as he does Power, Purcell, Pyke, Robertson, Rose, Smith, generally—in relation to plain English Sullivan T. B., Szczerbanik, Vaughan, Welford, legislation, yet at the very outset of this Code, Wells, Woodgate Tellers: Livingstone, Budd he presents a clause of this type. There is no NOES, 26—Beanland, Connor, Cooper, Davidson, point in saying that the section in the current Elliott, FitzGerald, Gamin, Gilmore, Grice, Healy, Horan, Johnson, Lester, Lingard, Malone, Perrett, Criminal Code is easier and simpler to follow Quinn, Rowell, Santoro, Simpson, Slack, Stephan because, quite clearly, it is not. On glancing at Turner, Watson Tellers: Springborg, Laming it, compared with this clause, the section in the current Criminal Code is fairly easy to read and Resolved in the affirmative. easy to comprehend. It might be that at some Legislative Assembly 12705 15 June 1995 stage in the future the Attorney-General might fact that the victim of that crime had an reconsider the wording of this clause and eggshell skull. In R v. Van Den Bemd there replace it with the wording in the current Code was a different decision. This goes in favour of because it certainly is plain English. The the decision in the Martyr case. It said, "If, wording in the current code is certainly plainer unbeknown to you, a person whom you walk than that which appears in the proposed up to and strike suffers from a particular illness Code. which means that that strike causes him to die Clause 10, as read, agreed to. or to suffer much greater than the amount of damage that you would expect in those Clauses 11 to 49, as read, agreed to. circumstances, you are responsible for that Clause 50— person's death and for the injury which you Mr BEANLAND (11.54 p.m.): Clause 50 cause." is headed "Intention—motive". I know there The other way in which this Parliament are problems with the equivalent section in the could go is the more accommodating way, current Code, but clause 50 does not seem to that is, by saying to the perpetrator of the clarify anything. I believe that the results of offence, "No, we will not punish you for the cases heard up to this time with respect to this consequences. We will not require you to take section have left something to be desired. It your victim as you found him. Rather, we will seems that the opportunity could have been only punish you for the fact that you hit that taken to have a more rigorous examination of person and punish you to the extent that you the issues raised by the section. I do not quite would be punished if that person did not suffer follow the policy behind clause 50. One can from the disability which caused him to end up envisage situations arising whereby a person much worse than he would have otherwise with a weakness, defect or abnormality is done." assaulted in a manner that would be In this Bill, I am recommending to innocuous to a normal person but which honourable members the doctrine in the results in consequences which were not Martyr case as against the doctrine in Van foreseen and would not normally result in a Den Bemd. It is a clear policy decision. The criminal responsibility. This clause seems to honourable member has correctly raised a remove that type of concept. The normal point which does require a policy decision. We case, for example, is where during a can either take the hard line, which is being consensual fight a person falls over and strikes recommended here, or we can take the softer, his head on some object and suffers a fatal more accommodating line, which is the line in haemorrhage. There needs to be some clear Van Den Bemd. direction given by this clause as to what the consequences would be in such a situation. Clause 50, as read, agreed to. In particular, paragraphs 2 and 3 of Clause 51— clause 50 relate to what I understand are Mr BEANLAND (11.59 p.m.): This called eggshell skull cases. That is certainly clause deals with intoxication. I refer to the what they are called under the current Code. definition of "intoxication" in proposed Will this mean that there will be more offences subsection 4, which states— of strict liability with less reference to the " 'intoxicated' means intoxicated, current eggshell skull rule? The clause will completely or partially, by alcohol, drugs, have quite an effect on cases when these or anything else." issues arise. It is a serious issue. There has been concern in relation to the current Code. It would seem that the term "or anything else" Clause 50 is not a simple one and concern is rather wide ranging. What exactly did the has been expressed that it is not clearly Attorney-General have in mind by the term "or worded and will mean more offences of strict anything else"? Will that cover, just as it says, liability. people who might in fact be sniffing on something and become intoxicated by a Mr WELLS: The honourable member substance? These days, a whole range of raises a very real concern. This is a very clear substances are on the market that people policy decision which this Parliament needs to seem to get high on. I wonder how far the take at this point. There are two cases. One term "or anything else" goes and to what it case is R v. Martyr. The other case is R v. Van might relate. Could the Attorney-General give Den Bemd. In the Martyr case, the court me some indication in that regard? decided that the defendant had to take his victim as he found him. That is to say, there Mr WELLS: This covers a was no diminution of the crime for which the commonsense fact: that if somebody spikes a person was to be convicted as a result of the person's drink without that person's 15 June 1995 12706 Legislative Assembly knowledge, or if somebody subjects a person section, which is different from the current to nitrous oxide or something like that without wording. I accept that. I note further that the that person's knowledge, and it is something word "necessary" has been removed but that which occurs independently of their being the word "reasonable" has remained. As a prepared to be involved in it, then that person result, this provision has been altered gets the benefit of the section. It is somewhat. I raise this matter because I commonsense that a person's culpability understand that the issue in the Castorina should not be the same as if that person had case was whether the force used was voluntarily become intoxicated and then necessary. The current law provides that consequently engaged in some criminal relevant force is the force that the owner of a activity. dwelling-house believes is necessary to Clause 51, as read, agreed to. prevent a break-in. That was the ground on which the Castorina case was fought. Whether Clauses 52 to 72, as read, agreed to. the force was reasonable or otherwise really Clause 73— did not enter the equation. Mr BEANLAND (12.01 a.m.): Clause I contend that, through the changes to 73, which relates to defence of premises this provision, people now have only one against crime, is very important. As several possible defence rather than two. I am members have already stated, the provision concerned that we do not create uncertainty, under the new Code is different from that because that is the worst thing that could contained within the current Code. Recently, a confront people attempting to defend person was called before the courts to answer themselves. It is all very well for other a charge under this provision. It is all very well members to cite all sorts of definitions, but at for the Government to change the provision the end of the day people have to know what relating to defence of premises against crime. the Director of Prosecutions would do in a I am sure that no-one wants to have to defend particular case; he is the one who decides his or her premises in the first place. I am sure whether or not to prosecute a particular case. that no-one wants to have to fight off Regardless of whether he gets a nudge from someone who has entered his or her the Government or from other people, the DP property—whether that be by using a gun or a has the ultimate responsibility in that regard. I cricket bat, which is probably the more usual seek a clear indication from the Attorney on situation. People involved in such an incident this definition. suffer tremendous trauma. I must also raise the matter of the word The people whose cases have been "intent". A person who wrote to one of the publicised recently have been greatly newspapers raised the point that, under the traumatised. Members would know that that proposed new Code, there is no definition for certainly applied to Mr Castorina. I am sure "intent". I looked for it when studying this that it applied to that gentleman from clause thoroughly. I did not find a definition for Rochedale. To this day, he probably still "intent" in the dictionary contained under wonders whether or not he did the right thing. Schedule 5. That may have some Be that as it may, the Government has ramifications for this particular clause. I am changed this provision. It was to be hoped keen to ensure that there is certainty on this that the Government would have brought matter. I am not encouraging people to start crime under control so that people would not committing violent offences; far from it. I do be confronted with this situation. Nevertheless, not want it to be construed that I am the position has been changed at a time of advocating that course, because I never have uncertainty amongst many members of the done and do not intend to start doing so now. community following the Castorina court case What people do to defend their property and and the police decision not to charge the premises is up to them. I warn people to be gentleman involved in that incident at very careful about using violence to defend Rochedale. I understand that there are some their property. If they do so without calling the other cases in north Queensland in which police, they may end up facing more problems prosecutions have not proceeded or, if they than they bargained for—not only through have, the prosecution has not been being charged but also through the trauma successful. I ask the Attorney to assure the that they will suffer in the unfortunate event Committee that the new provision will give that an intruder is badly injured or killed, which people a broader ability to defend their can easily occur. Such an incident need not homes. involve a gun; it may involve a cricket bat or a I note that the words "to enter the knife. There are a million and one scenarios premises" appear in the proposed new that one can imagine. Legislative Assembly 12707 15 June 1995

I seek clarification as to whether this This clause replaces the current provision, clause creates certainty. I have heard all the section 280 of the current Code, which propaganda and what has been said in the states— media and elsewhere. Because of the concern "It is a lawful for a parent or a person created by this clause, it is incumbent on the in the place of a parent, or for a Attorney to provide clarification and certainty in schoolmaster or master, to use, by way of relation to it. correction, towards a child, pupil, or Mr WELLS: I agree with what the apprentice, under his care such force as is honourable member for Indooroopilly has said reasonable under the circumstances." here and elsewhere about this particular issue. I rise in relation to this particular clause I would like to assure him that certainty is because, when I travel around the State, I find provided by this provision. There is currently a that many people, both at meetings and double test: it is necessary to prove that it was privately, raise this issue with me. They seem both reasonable and necessary to take the to be under some misapprehension—one action that was taken in defence of a which certainly seems to be spread around the dwelling-house. This clause simplifies that test schools—that parents under no circumstances and, by simplifying it, makes it more certain. can spank or use any other correctional force The test now is simply that the action should on their children whatsoever. I am not talking be reasonable at the time. One can imagine a about child abuse. All honourable members circumstance in which it is necessary to use know what child abuse is; it is covered in force to defend a dwelling-house and that it is various clauses of the Bill. There may be reasonable. One can imagine another United Nations conventions and a lot of talk situation in which it was reasonable to use about the rights of the child, but it should be force to defend one's dwelling-house but in clearly understood that this clause has been fact it was not necessary to use that force by retained in the new Code and that parents do virtue of some mistake or some apprehension have the ability to spank their children for which might have existed. It may well be that correctional or disciplinary purposes. the force used was used by virtue of the fact that the person who was defending the Unfortunately, many children seem to be dwelling-house thought that the person who of the view that they can say to their parents, was coming into the dwelling-house was "You cannot touch me, I can do whatever I armed, and had good reason for believing like. If you touch me, I am going to phone the that. In those circumstances, the use of force police." Members can throw off at this and say was reasonable but not necessary. By that it is a lot of nonsense. I did not believe it reducing to one the number of tests which until so many people started raising it with me have to be applied, we effect a very slight both publicly and privately. There is a liberalisation of the law but nevertheless misconception within the community on that maintain the safeguard that the action taken issue. must be reasonable in all the circumstances. Recently, there was a famous case cited I can give the honourable member the in the United States—I say that it was famous assurance that he seeks. We do have that because it received a lot of publicity—where a certainty. The term "reasonable" is very well woman spanked her child in the supermarket. understood in the law. I think that this Somebody apparently thought that she was provision will ensure that all residents will abusing the child so the police were called. understand what their rights are, because The woman was charged. The assault was not everybody understands what is reasonable in reported to any degree except in fine print at the circumstances. the back of a paper, or it might have been on the radio. Three or four months later, the Clause 73, as read, agreed to. charge against the woman was dropped Clauses 74 to 80, as read, agreed to. because there was no case to answer. The Clause 81— police suddenly realised that it was just a domestic discipline of the child—that the Mr BEANLAND (12.10 a.m.): Clause 81 woman had given the child a decent spank. deals with domestic discipline, which is There was no child abuse involved in that case covered in the current Code under section at all. 280. The proposed new section states— People often raise with me the fact that "A parent, a person in the place of a documents on the rights of children are being parent or a teacher may use reasonable distributed around schools. Of course, we correctional force towards a child in the have to care for our children; that is a major person's charge." social responsibility that we have. However, 15 June 1995 12708 Legislative Assembly children also have certain obligations. I want to clause and that he will not change it in any make it quite clear that, under both the new way. If that is the case, why did he table his and old Criminal Code, parents do have the additional advice? People are concerned opportunity or the choice—whatever term one about this issue, and it needs to be wishes to use—to discipline their child or, as addressed. the new term states, use correctional force on I am aware that, in 1991, amendments to their child, if they see fit. As I indicated the Acts Interpretation Act were made to allow previously, I am not talking about child abuse. a judge to refer to a Minister's speech in I am sure that parents know when they are Parliament if the section is unclear, but many abusing their children and when they are not. judges might believe the section is clear and This clause allows parents to use so not refer to the Minister's speech. domestic discipline on their children. I would Mr Wells interjected. like to put to bed the story that parents cannot discipline their children because of a United Mr BEANLAND: Whether it is clear or Nations convention. That is a lot of nonsense. unclear, the proper thing to do would be to That right is contained within the Criminal amend this clause. The fact is that the users Code for all to see. Parents have that ability, of the law refer to the legislation to construe and I believe it is a responsibility, and the the Act. They do not refer to bits of paper children have some responsibilities, too. scattered all around the place. What will happen to this additional piece of paper? Will Clause 81, as read, agreed to. it be attached to the Code or will it not? How Clause 82— many people will become aware that the Mr BEANLAND (12.15 a.m.): Clause 82 Minister in charge of this legislation actually relates to palliative care, which has been a tabled that piece of paper to explain this matter of great tension in the Chamber during clause? People look at legislation, they do not this debate. It has received perhaps more refer to a Minister's second-reading speech or attention than any other clause. Earlier, the look through Hansard to see if any documents Attorney-General tabled a document, and I on particular clauses are tabled. It does not again say how disappointed I was, when I matter who we are talking about, people are made my speech during the second-reading not interested in second-reading speeches, debate, that I had not had a chance to read they are interested in the legislation. that document at that time. I knew that the It smacks of incompetence that this Minister was tabling the document, but I did clause has not been dealt with in the proper not have a chance to read it before I made my way. The Minister can argue about the contribution to the debate. I have now had the separation of powers and so on, but his opportunity to read that document. actions indicate that more attention needs to The Attorney-General maintains that, by be paid to this clause. He tells us that he has the tabling of this document, he is sending a advice from the Litigation Reform Commission, clear explanation to the judiciary and to those but I do not recollect seeing that advice people who might be involved with this type of tabled. I have asked for that advice to be care. However, I believe that, because of the tabled before—and I may even have asked for importance of this clause, it would have been it again while talking about this clause—to see more appropriate to amend it. Two or three exactly what it says, because Mr O'Regan is definitions have already been thrown around an expert in this field. Whether members the table both yesterday and this evening. I opposite like it or not, he has an enormous read a definition from the June 1992 draft amount of knowledge of this type of thing. He report of Mr O'Regan, and during their has written academic reports on it. I have also contributions a couple of other members have received a number of very well argued read other definitions prepared by QCs. Plenty documents from a range of other people who of definitions have been thrown around. have a string of not just law degrees but also other degrees who are concerned about how One of the things that I find very strange this clause might be interpreted. about this definition—and I said this previously—is the fact that it does not even The Minister can tell me if he has rectified mention palliative care. I would have thought the situation; perhaps he has rectified it for the that a clause that relates to that particular type courts. The Attorney-General says that this of care would have at least mentioned that new Code is for the public—for the people. If term. The whole clause is fairly shoddy. The that is the case, this clause should be fixed up Attorney-General has said that he has made because people reading that might very well the clause clear and that he will not amend it. have a different interpretation of it to what the He says that he is perfectly happy with the Minister says that it means. The matters of Legislative Assembly 12709 15 June 1995 concern that have been expressed publicly member for Chermside are fresher in people's may well come to fruition. It would be terrible if minds. I shall answer his questions and then someone reading that clause acted on it while return to those of the honourable member for all the time having taken a different Indooroopilly. The member for Chermside interpretation of it from what the Minister asked: how does the statement address the intended. concerns raised about the meaning of the As I say, perhaps the courts will refer to clause? By some loose controversy in the that piece of paper, but I am sure that the community, some doubt had been cast upon public at large will not and that is where the the meaning of the clause. The statement whole basis of tabling that paper falls down. I spells out the intention of the Parliament very suggest that attention be given to this clearly, and that intention is recognised in particular clause as it does need to be section 14B of the amendment to the Acts reworded. The Minister has laid such Interpretation Act. The honourable member emphasis on this being a plain English would recall that, during the debate on the document that people can read that he might second reading of the Bill, I asked whether therefore indicate whether he will in fact give there was any member of the House who, by some attention to redrafting this particular the provision in this Bill, wishes to change the clause so that the words tabled in this law with respect to euthanasia. The answer Chamber are contained within it. was: no. History shows very clearly that legalising euthanasia is not part of the Mr T. B. SULLIVAN: I share many intention of this Parliament. concerns with other members of this Chamber and some sections of the community in The member's second question was: respect to clause 82 being used as a does clause 82, together with extrinsic backdoor approach to euthanasia or abortion material, maintain the integrity of the content on demand, yet the statement which the and the intended practice of the legislation? Minister tabled yesterday under Standing The answer to that question is: yes. The Order 241C, amending his second-reading member's third question was: will the clause speech, appears to close loopholes in this give protection to medical and nursing staff, clause being so misused. especially those working in the area of palliative care? The answer is: yes, this clause There are four points on which I ask the will do that. Even in recent times, it has been Minister to comment. How does the Minister's the case that some people have been in statement address the concerns raised with hospital, terminally ill and suffering from great him? Does clause 82, together with extrinsic pain, and they have said to a doctor or nurse, material, maintain the integrity of the intent "Would you please give me some more and the anticipated practice of this legislation? morphine?" and that doctor or nurse has said, Will this clause give protection to medical and "No, I will not give you more morphine, nursing staff, especially those working in the because if I do I may be prosecuted for area of palliative care? In brief, have the murder or manslaughter." In fact, those Minister's words and actions addressed the persons would not have been prosecuted for concerns raised in connection with this clause? murder or manslaughter. However, some Mr ELLIOTT: I want to express my people believe that this issue needs to be concern about clause 82, and that concern is addressed so that people working in hospices much the same as that expressed by other and hospitals, who confront this situation every members. A number of people have told me day, have the certainty that they can provide that they are most concerned that this the compassionate humanitarian pain relief particular clause could be a backdoor method which their profession and their compassion for the practice of euthanasia or, alternatively, would lead them to want to provide without abortion on demand. I also feel that an facing the risk of prosecution. The fear of explanation in that regard should be prosecution, which leads to the neglect of the forthcoming. I understand and have had a needs of a patient, is something which we, as look at the document which the Attorney- legislators, have a responsibility to address. General tabled tonight, but there still seems to We cannot have the people who work at the be some concern about it. I too would Royal Brisbane Hospital or the Mount Olivet welcome an explanation. hospice left in any doubt that they can provide Mr WELLS: I would have liked to the compassionate treatment that they wish to respond to the honourable member for provide to their patients. Indooroopilly and then the honourable The member's fourth question was: in member for Chermside, but I will not do that, brief, have my words and actions addressed because the questions from the honourable the concerns raised in connection with this 15 June 1995 12710 Legislative Assembly clause? The answer to that question is: yes, it that created an impetus, because those is translucently clear to history and the courts journalists did not put it as a question of what the intention of this Parliament is in this whether or not we should be using a particular case. set of words. Some journalists—as some I turn now to the questions raised by the journalists are wont to do—put it as a question honourable member for Indooroopilly. He of the competence, intelligence or ability of a asked: why do we not redraft this clause? The particular Minister. It is much more exciting if it answer is: because it is already as clear as it is written that way. I let them know that it came can possibly be. It is better than the O'Regan from the Litigation Reform Commission—a draft clause by virtue of the fact that it contains group of people whose legal credentials are more safeguards. This clause says that a even better than those of Rob O'Regan. surgical operation must be performed "in good I was rather surprised a few days later to faith and with reasonable care and skill" and read another article such as the one that we that it has to be done for the benefit of the saw in the paper the day before yesterday patient. It also has to be done without intent to wherein they went on to question the propriety take life. If death is caused, then that has to of my taking advice from judges. I was rather be the unintended consequence of the surprised because, again, I had not been medication. The O'Regan recommendation contacted or had this put to me. If they had did not contain those safeguards, and it would contacted me I could have advised them that be very inappropriate to go back to the section 75 of the Supreme Court Act not only O'Regan recommendation. permits but actually obliges the Government to For the benefit of the honourable take the advice of the Litigation Reform member, I will read the O'Regan Commission on these matters. But, recommendation, which is contained in draft surprisingly, in the intervening period not only section 69. It states— had they not contacted me to put this to me but they had failed to return phone calls from "A person is not criminally my office. responsible if he or she gives such palliative care as is reasonable in the The issue therefore became a political circumstances for the control or one. There were a couple of journalists out elimination of a person's pain and beating it up for all that they were worth suffering, even if such care shortens that without the benefit of hearing the other side of person's life, unless the patient refuses the case. In those circumstances, it was such care." natural that it should be debated extensively here in this Assembly tonight. But the truth of That section is without two of the major the matter is that the words are as plain as safeguards of the new clause: it covers plain can be. The truth of the matter is that the "reasonableness" but not "good faith" and "for intention of this Parliament is absolutely crystal the benefit of the patient". Consequently, this clear. The truth of the matter is that the clause is clearer and safer. It would be a risk to safeguards contained in this provision are use the O'Regan draft, which is why the much greater and much surer than the Cabinet decided not to use it. That is why we safeguard contained in the O'Regan provision. do not redraft it; it could not be clearer, and it could not be safer. It is a pity that this whole thing got started; it is a pity that this whole canard was run in the Why did we respond by putting in an community, but the appropriate response to additional note? Because a controversy had that is to spell it out in a way that cannot be been stirred up. How was it that a controversy mistaken, and we have done that by the was stirred up? I woke up one morning and insertion of this additional explanation in the read my copy of the Australian. To my Explanatory Notes. surprise, I found two articles—one by Scott Emerson and one by David Fagan—which Mr SZCZERBANIK: There is no-one in quoted a line from Rob O'Regan to the effect this Parliament who has seen this sort of that he objected to the phrase "withdrawal of activity occur anywhere. I have worked for 15 medical treatment". That was when the whole years in hospitals in different situations from thing got a bit of a roll on. I was rather intensive care to nursing homes and I know surprised to read that, because those that every nurse does her best for her journalists had not rung me up and put the patients. A judgment has to be made when a proposition to me; if they had done that, they patient comes to a nurse and asks for some would have discovered that the specific phrase pain relief. I know that there are some "withdrawal of medical treatment" came from members here who would do the same as I the Litigation Reform Commission. However, did when I was in that situation. Nurses have Legislative Assembly 12711 15 June 1995 to make a value judgment based on their Mr Purcell: He asked if anybody here training of three years and their experience in thought the Bill meant euthanasia. That is the the wards—and I had 15 years experience in question he asked. wards. Mr FITZGERALD: He clearly said, The doctor writes up the orders on "Does anyone now believe that the Bill whether the medication is to be administered provides for euthanasia?" three hourly, four hourly or six hourly, but in Mr Hamill: It is quite clear that that the medical ward he puts "PRN", which means provision does not provide for euthanasia. it is administered whenever required by the patient. If a patient asks the nurse on the ward Mr FITZGERALD: What was the for morphine, pethidine or any other pain question that the Attorney-General asked? relief, the nurse makes a judgment from her What question did the Attorney-General ask of best available knowledge. I am offended by all members of Parliament? He asked a very the Opposition's claims that nurses in the deliberate question of me. He asked a very wards are not making the decisions that they deliberate question of all members here. I have to. As I said before, nurses and doctors understood that it was to give it some more do the best for their patients and, if they have legal standing. What legal standing has it if to withdraw treatment from the patients, they some members said, no, that they did not do. I believe that that should occur. I find it believe so? very offensive that the Opposition is pulling Mr WELLS: The question I asked was: this sort of rabbit out of the hat and using was there any member here now who wanted scare tactics, which is what it always does. To to use this Bill as a vehicle for legalising gain an appreciation of this sort of thing, euthanasia. The answer was that there is people have to work in the wards. nobody in this Parliament who wants to use Honourable members opposite say that this Bill as a vehicle for legalising euthanasia. we should not do these things, but these are Euthanasia is a question of conscience for everyday occurrences. I know that the individual members. It is not something that member for Nerang was in a very difficult would be incorporated in a Government Bill. If situation early last year with his mother. Until a anybody here supported euthanasia and person gets in that sort of situation it is difficult wished to introduce it they would not seek to to make a value judgment. Nurses make value do so by the vehicle of a Government Bill, they judgments every day. would seek to do so by the vehicle of a private member's Bill as has been done in another Mr FITZGERALD: In response to jurisdiction and is contemplated in yet other queries on this clause the Attorney-General jurisdictions. asked if anyone in the Chamber was not quite clear on the meaning of this clause. I But whether there is a private member's interpreted that to mean that he was trying to Bill being planned in somebody's mind, I do send a clear signal out to the judges, the not know. I am unaware of any such thing but courts and to the community that this is what I do know is that this is a Government Bill exactly what the Parliament meant, that his and in this Government Bill we do not propose clarification under the Acts Interpretation Act to debate any issue of conscience. We do not had legal standing and that he also wanted to propose to legislate with respect to any issue ask, "Did anyone not understand it?" This was of conscience. All issues of conscience will be clearly what the Parliament was going to do. I raised by private member's Bills. The question ask the Attorney-General: what is the legal as to the legal status of the expression of the status of that if there are five voices that intention of Parliament, which we have had indicated they are not happy? He did it twice. very clearly here today, is that under section He did it earlier in his reply to the second- 14B of the Acts Interpretation Act the second- reading debate and he has done it now. reading speech of the Minister can be taken into account and so can the—— The question is: what is the legal status of a vote carried on the voices when there are a Mr Littleproud: Four other statements number of members of Parliament are not you made; is that right? here tonight who may have been expected to Mr WELLS: The Explanatory Note which vote on this? They may be here for the third I inserted with the leave of the honourable reading; they may be here for a later stage. member for Indooroopilly prior to his beginning The Attorney-General asked was there anyone his speech can be taken into account by the here who did not clearly understand that. My courts. That Explanatory Note makes it very understanding was that he did that so that clear what our intentions are here today. It there could be some legal interpretation of it. may be that people have different views on 15 June 1995 12712 Legislative Assembly the issue of conscience, which is constituted Mr WELLS: If I understand the by euthanasia. I am sure there are different honourable member's question correctly, the views. But what is unanimous in this answer to it is that what is reasonable is what Parliament is that nobody here wants to use commonsense says is reasonable; it is not this Bill as the vehicle for introducing what judges or lawyers think is reasonable, it is euthanasia. That would be inappropriate, it what the ordinary person in the street thinks is would be improper and it is not contemplated. reasonable. The Explanatory Note that I included makes Mr Beanland: That person at that that very, very clear. particular time? Mr BEANLAND: I asked the Attorney if Mr WELLS: A person placed as the he would table the advice of the Litigation person concerned is placed. Reform Commission. He did not indicate one way or the other as to whether or not he Mr Beanland: At that time and that would. I ask again whether he will table that event? advice in relation to this matter. Mr WELLS: Yes. I understand what the Mr WELLS: The advice of the Litigation honourable member means by the subjective Reform Commission was given at a meeting element. Say, for example, that the member between the Litigation Reform Commission for Indooroopilly were defending his home and and the court and law reform subcommittee of a court was trying to determine whether the Cabinet. I do not remember the date. Present amount of force that he used was reasonable were all four judges of the Litigation Reform in the circumstances or whether his response Commission, including two Appeal Court was reasonable in the circumstances. The judges. They were unanimous in their view court would not be asking what would be the with respect to that clause. There are no public appropriate response for an elderly and infirm documents that issue from the Litigation lady; it would be asking what would be Reform Commission, but I assure the reasonable for a man in good health and in honourable member that the Litigation Reform the prime of his life. Those would be the Commission was unanimous in its expression subjective elements, I think, to which the of opinion on this point. honourable member is referring. Clause 82, as read, agreed to. Clause 83, as read, agreed to. Clause 83— Clauses 84 and 85, as read, agreed to. Mr BEANLAND (12.42 a.m): I refer to Clause 86— the objective meaning of "reasonable" in Mr ELLIOTT (12.46 a.m.): In my speech certain circumstances and direct a question to during the debate on the second reading of the Attorney in relation to this clause. I notice the Bill, I noted the omission from the that it says "Objective meaning of legislation of a definition of "death". I ask the 'reasonable' ". I ask whether there is also a Attorney-General to comment on whether or subjective meaning to this particular clause. not he gave that matter further thought and After reading it through, it seems to me that, in whether he asked for any advice on that. some circumstances, it could very well be that Perhaps he may provide a good and practical a person could have to subjectively determine reason for not providing a definition of "death". what the situation was when an offence was Does he understand what I was getting at in committed. The term "reasonable" is used in a relation to the particular case to which I number of sections throughout the Code, and referred him? I believe that it is particularly important that members have a very clear understanding of Mr WELLS: The definition of "death" is its meaning. For example, I can envisage a contained in legislation relating to transplants, situation in which, in the darkness of the night, which comes within the Health portfolio. for example, someone is being assaulted, and Clause 86, as read, agreed to. it looks as though that person has a knife and Clauses 87 to 92, as read, agreed to. is about to use it. In such a situation, it may be that the person could use such force as is Clause 93— sufficient to kill or cause grievous bodily harm. Mr BEANLAND (12.47 a.m.): This I am not arguing against that point; I want to clause relates to the onus and standard of clear up the point that one does not proof for the defence. When I read this cause, necessarily argue against such a proposition. it occurred to me that perhaps there should be Is it intended that this also be a subjective an indication somewhere in relation to the meaning to the term "reasonable"? I prosecution and what it must prove beyond understand the objective aspect of it. reasonable doubt. I did not see any mention Legislative Assembly 12713 15 June 1995 of that within this Code. I may have missed it; professor of law at the Bond University on the it may be somewhere else. There may be a Gold Coast, Mr Eric Colvin, who is a very very good reason for it not being spelt out. respectable professor of law and one well In checking through the O'Regan draft, I versed in these matters—I would have thought noticed that on page 44 there is reference to that this is not something that should have the onus and standard of proof. It states— been overlooked but, in fact, should have been included in this Code. Certainly, it is a "(1) The onus of proof that a criminal fundamental aspect of our law. Nevertheless, offence has been committed shall be in a Code that includes so many other aspects upon the prosecution and the standard of and matters, one would have expected that proof shall be beyond reasonable doubt. particular matter to be included—as well as a The prosecution shall be required to reference to the word "intent", which I raised negative beyond reasonable doubt all previously. matters of defence, exculpation, justification, or excuse, if such matters Mr WELLS: When the section—which properly arise from the evidence which the honourable member read out has been adduced. correctly—was drafted, it codified the common law. When such a section is not restated in the (2) Where a particular defence is present Bill, we simply resume the common provided for by words such as 'it is a law position, which was previously codified. It is defence to prove that' or words to the like not written down because it does not need to effect, or where the defences of insanity be written down. Some things are so or diminished responsibility are raised, the fundamental to us that it is unnecessary to burden shall be on the accused to write them down. One of those fundamental establish that defence on the balance of things is our belief in democracy. Nowhere do probabilities." we actually write that down in our laws. (3) Proof that the courts of Another thing which is equally fundamental is Queensland have jurisdiction pursuant to the proposition that a person is innocent until sections 15 or 18 of the Code to try any proven guilty and that a person can be proven person for an offence shall be on the guilty only by being proven to be guilty beyond balance of probabilities." all reasonable doubt. I am not sure of the reasons for not including Clause 93, as read, agreed to. something of that nature in the Bill. No doubt Clauses 94 to 96, as read, agreed to. the Attorney will be able to furnish members Clause 97— with a reason for that. As there is an onus and Mr LINGARD (12.52 a.m.): The standard of proof for the defence, I am sure that I will not be the only person who reads Explanatory Notes state that clause 97 that section and wonders why there is no incorporates the effect of sections 295, 296 reference to the standard of proof for the and 297 of the current Code and states that prosecution. Yesterday, I noted that a there has been no change to the current law. professor of law wrote to one of the daily Section 295 of the current Code outlines the newspapers to the same effect. I ask the offence of causing death by threats, and gives a detailed explanation. Section 296 outlines Attorney-General whether he could furnish the offence of acceleration of death, and gives members with the reason for that omission. a detailed explanation of that. Section 297 Mr WELLS: This just picks up the outlines the offence of when injury or death common law, which is that the burden of proof might be prevented by proper precaution, and is on the Crown and that the proof must be gives the details. beyond all reasonable doubt. This is so If indeed a court is prepared to interpret fundamental to our legal system that it is the rather sparse wording of clause 97 to unnecessary to state it except by implication. It include the detail of the offences set out in is stated by implication in clause 93, which sections 295, 296 and 297, there has been no states that in those cases where a burden of change in the law as it relates to those three proof is placed upon somebody who is sections of the current Code. However, establishing a defence then they have only to because of the limitations of the clause as prove it to the level of the balance of drafted, a court might well expand the probabilities. application of clause 97 in unforeseen ways. Mr BEANLAND: I accept that I might Clause 97 states— not appreciate that; but when professors of "A person who in any way causes law from eminent universities are writing anyone's death is taken to kill that other articles to that effect—and I refer to the person." 15 June 1995 12714 Legislative Assembly

The difficulty with such a seemingly simple completely sections 295, 296 and 297 of the definition is its very simplicity. Under this current Code? clause, liability depends upon a concept of Mr WELLS: Yes, it certainly is intended causation. That is why the 1900 Code went to to do that. I also draw the attention of the great lengths to spell out what events ought to honourable member to clauses 87 and 86, be considered to be the chain of events which are read in conjunction with that leading to death. particular clause. Clause 86 relates to a duty A principle that has vexed the legal to provide the necessaries of life to another system has been this question of cause and person. It states— effect not only in relation to criminal matters "If a person contravenes a duty but also in relation to the law of torts. If one imposed on the person by this part, the does a simple act that sets other acts in person is taken to cause any effect that motion, is one liable for every consequence the contravention of the duty has on the that follows? The law usually attempts to life, health or safety of anyone . . ." determine what might be reasonably foreseen as a consequence of an act rather than deal When one takes that clause into account, if with the concept of causation. Clearly, vague one contravenes a duty, therefore, one fails to clauses such as clause 97 open up the provide the necessaries of life to somebody to possibilities that the court will limit their whom one should provide the necessaries of application or find ways to read down the life, or if one does not do the duties of a clause. I am highlighting that the Code, meant parent, as stipulated in this section, and to last for another 100 years as this one mischief is caused as a result, yes, that person should, should not in any way be so ill defined is taken to be part of the causal chain. For the at the outset as to invite judicial purposes of clause 97, which the honourable misinterpretation. If Parliament has an member read, one would also be liable, that intention, then clearly we must outline that is, the chain of causation would be deemed by intention. I ask the Minister: will he outline the the law to hold. intention of clause 97? Clause 97, as read, agreed to. Mr WELLS: I do not know that I can Clause 98— make it very much clearer for the honourable member. A person who in any way causes Miss SIMPSON (12.58 a.m.): Clause anyone's death is taken to kill the other 98 states— person. The Explanatory Notes state— "A child becomes a person capable "The definition in these terms of being killed when it has completely incorporates the effect of the following proceeded in a living state from the body sections of current Code . . . Causing of its mother." death by threats . . . Does that mean that in the eyes of the law a Acceleration of death . . .When injury or child cannot be killed until it has been born death might be prevented by proper alive? Does that mean that the person who precaution." deliberately kills a child in the womb cannot be charged with murder or manslaughter? There has been no change to the current law. The Explanatory Notes spell that out. I Mr WELLS: That is the current law. This would be assisted if the honourable member clause is identical to the current law. To could give me an instance of where he thinks change that would be a matter for a private that this clause might not actually achieve the member's Bill and a conscience vote. To result that is clearly intended. Does the change that law would raise the question of member have a specific instance in mind, or a abortion. It is a matter that might very well particular case? exercise the minds of honourable members, but the appropriate vehicle for the changing of Mr LINGARD: I cite this case: if I that law is not by a Government Bill but by a recklessly drop a rock from a wall, a motorist private member's Bill. veers to avoid it, collects a beehive on the side of the road, and the bees in a rage sting a Miss SIMPSON: With respect, I table passer-by, who suffers an extreme allergic an article from the Courier-Mail which refers to reaction and dies, can I be said to have unborn victims of home abuse. It refers to a caused that death? I certainly did not outline shocking study with regard to unborn babies the case from the start, but the Minister has dying from domestic violence. It was a Royal asked me to outline a case. Clearly, what I ask Women's Hospital study, and that study is: is the intention of clause 97 to cover revealed that of 1,014 women, 30 per cent Legislative Assembly 12715 15 June 1995 had been the victims of abuse before or Miss SIMPSON: Clause 109 seems to during pregnancy. contradict this clause. Clause 109 states that I do not think that those women were the killing of an unborn child carries a consenting to abuse. Clearly, in those maximum penalty of life imprisonment. examples referred to in the survey, there However, the Attorney-General just referred to would have been women who would have instances of women's children being been subject to abuse, the clear intent of intentionally killed in their womb at eight which was to cause the death of the child. months. That is not abortion; it is murder of Therefore, I refer the Attorney-General to the child. In a few more weeks, had the child women who have had unborn children killed been born, that offence would have been with intent and without their consent, even up considered as murder in the eyes of the law. to the eighth month of pregnancy—about We are talking about an eight month gestated which the Minister's office has been made child. I need to make the point that the aware. The Coroners Act and the Registration Attorney-General did not make clear why of Births, Deaths and Marriages Act refers to clause 98 contradicts clause 109 and the an unborn child of 20 weeks of age as a maximum penalty of life imprisonment for the person, yet this clause in this legislation refers killing of an unborn child. The options that the to a child as being a person once that child is Attorney-General just referred to are far less born. How do we resolve the issue that severe. Procuring an abortion carries 14 years' children are being killed without the consent of imprisonment. That is not a maximum of life the mother even in the eighth month of imprisonment. The offence of assault does not pregnancy? What is the Minister going to do address the concerns of the child. After the about it? child's birth in a few more weeks, the offender Mr WELLS: The events to which the would have faced a far harsher sentence. honourable member refers are abominations. This is not an issue of conscience, this is As the honourable member indicates, I am an issue of a child who has not been killed aware that such events have occurred. The through the procurement of an abortion but law that we have now is the law as it has been who had the misfortune to not be considered for an extremely long time. The vehicle by a child in the eyes of this law for the sake of a which this law could be changed would be a few weeks. What is the Attorney-General private member's Bill. It would not be changed going to do to recognise the humanity of by a Government Bill, because that would children who are post 20 weeks? raise all the questions of abortion. It would be Mr WELLS: The honourable member is necessary for a private member to introduce a perfectly correct; it is an abominable crime to Bill. The honourable member would find that do such a thing. The killing of an unborn child there would be an extremely vigorous debate may be available to prosecution in certain in relation to changing this provision. That circumstances. Whether it is or not is a debate would not be along party lines but decision for the prosecutor, just as is whether along the lines of differing consciences. That is grievous bodily harm is available or whether why there is no attempt to change that law in the abortion provision is the provision which this Bill. If the honourable member feels should be used. The honourable member deeply about it, she has the opportunity that asked what the Government is going to do every member of this Chamber has to put about the destruction of a foetus older than 20 forward a private member's Bill on the subject. weeks, or whatever number of weeks she Mr T. B. SULLIVAN: I refer to a indicated. That makes it very clear that what is scenario similar to that painted by the previous being raised here is an issue of conscience. If questioner. As a result of an attack or an the honourable member feels deeply about it, incident of domestic violence, if a woman is then the honourable member has the liberty to seriously injured and the child she is carrying introduce a private member's Bill. But because ceases to live, is there another provision in this it is an issue of conscience, it would be most Bill which would cover such an attack upon the improper for the Government to try to coerce woman and the child? the consciences of honourable members one Mr WELLS: Depending on the way or the other by trying to include in a circumstances of the case, there are a number Government Bill an issue that was an issue of of other provisions, including grievous bodily conscience. We are not trying to do that. harm and abortion, both of which carry very We have been criticised by those who serious penalties. Grievous bodily harm carries were in favour of abortion on demand for the a maximum of life imprisonment and abortion, fact that such a provision has not been depending on the circumstances of the case, included in this Criminal Code. I am not carries a maximum of 14 years' imprisonment. surprised to receive some criticism from those 15 June 1995 12716 Legislative Assembly supporting the other side of the argument as Clause 98, as read, agreed to. well. But the only fair and proper thing that a Clause 99, as read, agreed to. Government can do when it is reviewing a Criminal Code, a Code which contains a Clause 100— provision relating to abortion, is to say, "We Mr ARDILL (1.11 a.m.): I ask the are not going to change the existing law, and Attorney: what are the circumstances we will leave it to the consciences of private surrounding clause 100? In what way can members to move private member's Bills to clause 100 be implemented? give effect to the directions in which their Mr WELLS: This is just the consciences send them." I would invite the commonsense meaning of it. As the honourable member, if she feels strongly Explanatory Notes state, clause 100 provides about this issue, to exercise the right which that if a child dies because of an act done or every member has in this Chamber and omission made by a person before or during legislate. It is not for me to move such a Bill. I the child's birth, that person is taken to have am probably the only person in the Chamber killed the child. The Explanatory Notes also who cannot. spell out that there has been no change to the Mr FITZGERALD: I seek further current law. clarification of the clause with which we are Mr T. B. SULLIVAN: I ask: does what dealing. I refer also to clause 109, which the Attorney just said cover the issue raised relates to killing an unborn child. I will not go earlier by the member for Maroochydore? through the domestic violence issue that has been raised. We have got as far as we are Mr WELLS: It may; it will all depend on going to get with that. I cite the instance of a the circumstances of each case, and that of traffic accident involving a pregnant lady. A course will be a matter for the prosecutor. It neighbour of mine was in this situation. The would be a matter in which we as legislators accident was caused by somebody driving would not be involved. dangerously. The young family lost the child Clause 100, as read, agreed to. that the mother was carrying through Clauses 101 to 108, as read, agreed to. someone else's negligent driving. What charges could be brought against that Clause 109— driver—causing injury, grievous bodily harm, or Miss SIMPSON (1.13 a.m.): With driving offences? This case is special. If a regard to clause 109, I ask: does it do woman is carrying the only child that she can anything other than use a bit of ink? Does it probably have, it is a little different from the have any effect in law? case of someone who loses their legs in an Mr WELLS: Yes, it does have the accident. The driver who caused the accident obvious effect that is spelt out in the Bill and may have been drunk or stoned to the wall on the Explanatory Notes. There have been drugs. The case of this family who lost an prosecutions under this section, and there unborn child that may have been a month or have been convictions under this section. less from being born obviously is not covered in this definition. Is there any provision in this Miss SIMPSON: Further to that—if a legislation to bring a more serious charge woman who is eight months' pregnant is against the accused in such an instance than attacked, and the attacker has the intent to kill just causing grievous bodily harm? that unborn child, what does this section do for her? Will this clause see that justice is done? Mr WELLS: I have indicated what the existing law says, and I have indicated that the Mr WELLS: The courts have interpreted existing law is not changing with respect to this section, which says "about to give birth to these matters. I think it is appropriate that a child", to refer to a period very close indeed honourable members should inform to the birth of the child. I think that the themselves of the law and the state of the law honourable member has probably asked in this respect, and I have done that as clearly enough questions to understand clearly the as I can. The penalties that are available are effect of the existing Code and to understand the penalties that I have indicated and if the fact that that does not change the existing honourable members think that the definition Code in those respects. She probably has of life as it is contained in the Criminal Code enough information now to make a decision here needs emendation for the types of for herself as to whether her conscience would reasons that they have just raised, again I lead her to want to introduce a private would say to them that the opportunity is member's Bill on the subject. available to them to prepare a private Miss SIMPSON: I have one final member's Bill. question in regard to this clause: does the Legislative Assembly 12717 15 June 1995

Attorney have any conscience about a child grievous sexual assault, which also carries a being murdered at eight months in the penalty of life imprisonment. womb—the fact that life imprisonment is not a Mr BEANLAND: I accept what the sentencing option available for such an Attorney has said. However, I point out that offender and the fact that he will not offer to nothing under proposed section 116 will mean people suffering domestic violence the same that people are sentenced to life degree of protection under the law? imprisonment. The life sentence is not Mr WELLS: The kind of offence to mandatory, and I accept that. At present, which the honourable member has referred is people are being sentenced to four years' an abomination. imprisonment and being released after two, or being sentenced to eight years' imprisonment Clause 109, as read, agreed to. and being released after two. Regardless of Clauses 110 to 115, as read, agreed to. the other points that the Attorney raised, nothing under the proposed section will make Clause 116— any difference to the penalty that offenders Mr BEANLAND (1.16 a.m.): This clause receive. is the start of the "Rape and other sexual Mr WELLS: In recent times, I have assaults" section. Clause 116 deals with rape. appealed against leniency of sentence in I note that the maximum penalty for rape is life respect of a number of cases of rape. The imprisonment. I have no problem with that at penalties in respect of rape are now typically all. I note also that some material that has higher than they were in the past—8 years, 16 been sent out by Government members years—— states that the new Code provides life Mr Beanland: 1995 we're on—six imprisonment for the offence of rape. I point years. out that that is the penalty for rape under the current Code. A perusal of the range of Mr WELLS: I think that the member sentences imposed for offences of rape would find that the average penalty for rape reveals that a wide range of sentences have has increased significantly recently as a result been handed out. One person was given four of recent Court of Appeal decisions. years' gaol on a charge of rape but served Mr BEANLAND: I have here the 1995 only two years. In another case, a person was list of sentencing decisions. I accept that the sentenced to four years' gaol on a charge of Attorney has appealed in some cases, but I rape but was released after having served less still see sentences such as six years, six than two years. In another case involving the months and nine years. The latter case was rape of an elderly woman, the penalty appealed, but the appeal was dismissed. imposed was eight years' imprisonment with a Mr Hollis: That's up to the judge. It's up non-parole period of two years. A range of to him. other offences is contained in another document that I have with me. It does not Mr BEANLAND: I accept that outline the period after which these people interjection. However, I make the point that were released, but I am sure that it would nothing contained within this clause will have been much less than their actual change the current situation. I accept the fact sentences. This document reveals that people that the Attorney has been lodging some have been sentenced to terms of six years' appeals of late. Perhaps he is lodging more imprisonment and sentences of that order. appeals now than was previously the case. I do not know; I have not checked that out. I I accept that, in the following clauses, have here another appeal where the sentence some alterations have been made to sexual was seven years' imprisonment with no assault offences. I support those measures. I recommendation for parole; the appeal was ask: what changes have been made to the dismissed. That is on the 1995 table of offence of rape—which previously carried a sentencing decisions. maximum penalty of life imprisonment—that will make it different under this Code from the Mr WELLS: Significant attention in this current Criminal Code? On the face of it, the Criminal Code is placed on things which make offence appears to be the same. it clear to the courts and others in the legal community that this Parliament takes offences Mr WELLS: The difference is that it such as rape extremely seriously. Rape is now refers to a person; it does not refer to a listed as part of a category of offences, that is, woman. It says "anyone", and therefore the rape and other sexual assaults. Significant provision is not confined. The other difference attention has been paid to the spelling out of is that there is alongside that a provision for these kinds of offences with the new offence 15 June 1995 12718 Legislative Assembly of sexual assault being part of the battery of alcohol—over 0.15, which is pretty well charges that can be brought against stoned—the maximum penalty is 14 years' somebody who engages in that kind of imprisonment. criminal activity. These are facts I am sure that Mr Ardill: There's no way of testing it. the court would take into account when assessing the seriousness with which this Mr FITZGERALD: The honourable Committee regarded the offence of rape. The member for Archerfield says that there is no court would also have regard to the fact that way of testing the amount of drugs in a we had retained the maximum penalty of life person's body. Clause 134(1)(b)(ii) states— imprisonment. No higher maximum penalty "is adversely affected by an intoxicating can be given. substance." Clause 116, as read, agreed to. It is possible to gauge a blood alcohol content Clauses 117 to 133, as read, agreed to. between 0.05 and 0.15, but how on earth does one work out whether a person has had Clause 134— one joint of marijuana and is adversely Mr FITZGERALD (1.23 a.m.): This affected? How do we determine that that clause relates to the dangerous operation of a person is adversely affected? It is possible to vehicle. I am a bit mystified. Subclause (1) measure the blood alcohol content in a states— person's blood, and the courts can easily "A person must not operate a vehicle decide on what blood alcohol level would dangerously in a public place. constitute a driver being adversely affected by alcohol. Maximum penalty— Mr Campbell: If that's the case, you get (a) 14 years imprisonment, if— seven years; go down to (c). (i) the person kills or does Mr FITZGERALD: What constitutes an grievous bodily harm to offence that carries a sentence of seven years' anyone else; and imprisonment when a person kills somebody (ii) the concentration of alcohol or does grievous bodily harm? If a person has in the person's blood is at an intoxicating substance in his or her body, least 150 mg of alcohol per that person can receive a maximum penalty of 100 ml of blood". up to 10 years' imprisonment, and if he or she For us laymen—I presume that is 0.15. That has a blood alcohol level over a certain level, alcohol content carries a maximum penalty of 14 years' imprisonment is the maximum 14 years' imprisonment. That relates to alcohol penalty. What is the case study? only. Further down, the subclause states— Mr Ardill: You can't quantify it. "(b) 10 years imprisonment, if the Mr FITZGERALD: The member says person— that we cannot determine it! We are putting (i) kills or does grievous bodily this in law here. harm to anyone else; and Mr Ardill interjected. (ii) is adversely affected by an Mr FITZGERALD: The Attorney- intoxicating substance." General is getting advice, so he will obviously I presume that "intoxicating substance" means give me a better answer than the member is drugs. In other words, an alcohol level of over giving me. He thinks it is easy. I will not go 0.15 carries a maximum penalty of 14 years' through the full range of illegal drugs, but how imprisonment, and an alcohol level under 0.15 have the courts determined, or how do they carries a maximum penalty of 10 years' presently determine when a person is imprisonment. I understand that. As I said, I adversely affected by an intoxicated presume that "intoxicating substance" means substance? drugs. Mr WELLS: The courts use the A Government member interjected. circumstantial indicia that are available. This does not significantly change the law; this is Mr FITZGERALD: The honourable the law as it was when the Opposition was in member says that it is marijuana, but I do not Government. The facts of the case are simply care what drug we are talking about. If a assessed by the court. In respect of those person is stoned to the eyeballs on illegal cases in which there is no obvious way of drugs and drives a car, the maximum penalty testing the amount of drug in a person's is 10 years' imprisonment, yet if a person is body—one considers the behaviour of the stoned to the eyeballs on a legal drug, that is, person and refers to the appropriate indicia Legislative Assembly 12719 15 June 1995 which have been built up by practice over a but I would expect that if this Parliament period of years. doubles the penalties, the court will double the Mr BEANLAND: This clause deals with periods of imprisonment that it hands out. the operation of a vehicle dangerously. I Mr FITZGERALD: I have received notice that the definition of "vehicle" includes a some advice and I have some queries in waterski or surfboard or anything else that can relation to this matter. Clause 170, the be used to carry persons or goods from place burglary provision, sensibly removes the old to place. I am sure there is a definition of concept of "break" in break and enter. The "vehicle" in the current Code, although I have explanatory note at page 42 states— not been able to locate it. Could the Attorney- "Clause 170 amalgamates and General give some indication for including replaces sections 419, 420, 421 and 422 waterskis and surfboards? Have there been of the current Code and creates the some difficulties in that regard? Is that why following crimes:- that is being included, or is it something new? Was it in the previous Code? burglary with grievous bodily harm; burglary with violence; Mr WELLS: This is taken from the Canadian model Code. The Government is burglary while armed with a aware of serious injuries that have occurred as dangerous thing (which includes a a result of impacts between those means of dangerous or offensive weapon or transportation and individuals. instrument and an explosive or noxious substance); Clause 134, as read, agreed to. burglary of premises at night; Clauses 135 to 169, as read, agreed to. burglary of a dwelling house; and Clause 170— burglary. Mr BEANLAND (1.30 a.m.): Clause 170 relates to burglary. It is a very significant The provision simplifies the existing clause because it covers a range of important law by removing the element of 'breaking' matters. It covers the old break and enter laws from the crimes created. To establish the as well, with the longest term of imprisonment offence, the prosecution must prove that being 20 years. It is clear that, previously, a person (who is not an occupier) has people committing break and enter offences entered or is in premises with intent to have been receiving relatively light sentences. commit a crime, or has entered or is in I am aware that the Attorney-General has premises and has committed a crime." been appealing against some of those However, a reading of clause 170 shows sentences, but the sentences still remain that the Explanatory Notes do not deal with extremely light. the question of the occupier's consent. Is it What might we expect in relation to this not, as the Explanatory Notes suggest, particular section, because it now also includes sufficient for the prosecutor to prove "that a the unlawful use of a motor vehicle? On the person (who is not an occupier) has entered or point that the penalties have been increased is in premises with intent to commit a crime, or significantly, what increase does the Minister who has entered or is in premises and has believe there will be in penalties for break and committed a crime"? Under clause 170, the enter offences following the change in this prosecutor must also prove absence of particular provision of the Criminal Code? It is consent to be on the premises. all very well to say that the maximum penalty Further, to say that the section is now some 20 years' imprisonment for a "amalgamates and replaces sections 419, range of offences and 14 years for others, but 420, 421 and 42 of the current Code" does people are more concerned with the sorts of not seem completely correct. The current penalties that people who commit offences Code, for example, in section 420 provides— under this legislation will in fact receive. "Entering dwelling house with intent Mr WELLS: I accept the honourable to commit an indictable offence. Any member's concern with respect to this matter. I person who enters or is in the dwelling think that people are deeply concerned about house of another with intent to commit an this particular area and we are doubling the indictable offence therein is guilty of a penalties. The honourable member has asked crime, and is liable to imprisonment for me how much do I think this will yield in terms seven years. of increases in penalties actually administered If the offence is committed in the night, by courts. I do not have a crystal ball that the offender is liable to imprisonment for would enable me to read the future, of course, 14 years." 15 June 1995 12720 Legislative Assembly

Section 420 says nothing about the offence Clause 180— having to be committed in the absence of the Mr FITZGERALD (1.38 a.m.): The occupier's consent to be in the dwelling house. Explanatory Notes state at page 45— However, clause 170 of the draft Code says— "Clause 180 replaces section 441 of the "A person who is not the occupier of current Code. It defines 'tamper' and a particular premises must not: creates the following crimes:— (a) enter, or be in, the premises . . . without the occupier's consent with "Tamper" with a document means:— intent to commit a crime in the premises; or (a) damage the document; (b) hide the document; (b) enter, or be in, the premises without the occupier's consent and (c) falsify the document." commit a crime in the premises." Section 441 of the 1900 Code specifically mentions "destroy". Again, I suggest that the Take the following example: Julia invites so-called plain English plan is failing. I Richard home for coffee after a night out. presume that the Attorney-General wishes to Richard goes, predetermined to have sexual include destruction of a document within this intercourse with her whether she consents or artificial definition he now calls "tamper". I take not. That is a typical date rape. After sexual the view that "destroy" is not, as a matter of foreplay Julia refuses intercourse and Richard legal definition, included? The question is: if rapes her. At no time did Julia have the one destroys the document, is that tampering opportunity to ask Richard to leave the with the document? Is it or is it not? It says premises. that tamper means to damage, hide or falsify Mr Campbell: That is not burglary. the document. What happens if one destroys the document? Mr FITZGERALD: Opposition members might have better legal advice than I am Mr WELLS: Yes, I believe that it does. getting. On the basis of clause 170 of the draft Damage to property is referred to in clause Code, Richard clearly entered at Julia's 189. If one looks at that, it states that to invitation. The consent given by her was not damage property includes— withdrawn. Apart from having to engage in an "(a) destroying the property; and interpretation exercise of the Code to attempt . . . . to establish that, as a matter of law, a withdrawal of consent might be implied, the (c) for a document—deal with a document question is: is the withdrawal of consent so that . . ." implied? That is an exotic argument, to say Then it goes on to qualities described as the least. The prosecution cannot convict tampering with the document. So the term Richard under this provision. Under section "tampering with documents", while it prohibits 420 of the 1900 Code the elements were that the lesser interference with those documents, Richard enters or is in Julia's house with the also prohibits the larger interference with those intention of committing rape on her there. documents. This is another example of so-called plain Clause 180, as read, agreed to. English and an attempt at the Clauses 181 to 189, as read, agreed to. oversimplification of legal principles, and it fails Clause 190— to achieve the purpose that I presume the Government intends. Mr BEANLAND (1.42 a.m.): This clause partly refers to plants. I have made reference Mr WELLS: In the circumstances which to this previously. Part of the definition on the honourable member raises, if the page 112 of the Bill has been somewhat admission is gained fraudulently then it is no extended in relation to the definition of admission and therefore there is no consent to "relevant property". It means complete or the person being there for whatever else might incomplete premises; a complete or follow. With respect to the case that the incomplete vehicle; a mine or a mine's honourable member mentioned, the workings, fittings or appliances; a stack of appropriate charge would be rape rather than cultivated vegetable produce, or of mineral or burglary, and that would carry a life penalty. vegetable fuel; a crop of cultivated vegetable Clause 170, as read, agreed to. produce, hay or grass, whether standing or cut; or a stand, paddock or other area of trees, Clauses 171 to 179, as read, agreed to. shrubs or grass. It would appear—and I seek Legislative Assembly 12721 15 June 1995 some clarification from the Minister—that that the plant is picked up under this section. plants are included under that particular A person can be charged for unlawful damage definition. It seems to me quite clear that but not for actually stealing the plant. Is that plants are not covered under that particular the case, or am I wrong? definition of "property" in clause 151, which Mr WELLS: No. The term "property", refers to "a thing produced by an animal", the where it refers to real property, is covered in manure and so forth, but not the plant. the Acts Interpretation Act, and it obviously I am particularly concerned about pot includes pot plants—real property and plants and things like that, because it is personal property. Pot plants are included incredible just how many plants are pinched here. and turn up at all sorts of places. Some Clause 190, as read, agreed to people make quite a big deal out of this. As well, this could affect people who have a lot of Clauses 191 to 203, as read, agreed to. plants; they might be stolen. Some people in Clause 204— the community are concerned about this, Mr FITZGERALD (1.47 a.m.): This because the current Code seems to cause clause is very important and basic to the whole problems in this regard. People are concerned question of the law. It deals with perjury. In the that this issue has not been picked up in this December 1994 draft Code, there was a new Code. section 115. Subclause (4) states— Under "Unlawful damage" there is a "A person cannot be convicted of separate definition of "relevant property", perjury or of counselling or procuring the which relates only to Part 6—Damage to commission of perjury on the property, not the remainder of the Code. The uncorroborated testimony of one witness." dictionary contained in Schedule 5 explicitly states that the definition in clause 151 applies I notice that in the draft that was tabled in this to Chapter 3 Part 1, thereby making the Chamber as the Criminal Code, and now in definition in clause 190 mutually exclusive of this Bill, I cannot find that particular clause. I Part 6 of Chapter 3. In the inclusive definition suggest to the Attorney-General that he is of Chapter 3 Part 1, the class of plants is not dealing with a matter of perjury; that it is included. It seems that in the exclusive obviously one person's word against other definition—Chapter 3 Part 6—it was necessary facts that have been established. It would to include items which should have been obviously be necessary to have that; one included in the plant class in Chapter 3 Part 1; would not want somebody to be convicted of but no such class exists. It would therefore perjury if only one other person was a witness appear that the legislation is deficient in against that person. This is taking one relation to stealing a plant. Put another way: person's word against that of another. this is not a legal offence. I seek some Normally, one would want stronger evidence clarification on this matter, because it is than that. Why was it in the December 1994 something which affects more people than draft Code? Why has it been taken out? Is it one might appreciate. It seems to be picked hidden somewhere else in the Bill and I just up in the section dealing with unlawful cannot find it? Perjury is a most serious damage, but not as far as stealing a plant. offence. I thought it would have been very When I say "pot plant" I mean the plant. desirable or even very necessary to have Certainly we could pick someone up for corroboration on the issue of perjury. stealing the pot, and certainly we could pick Mr WELLS: As the honourable member someone up for stealing manure. But the very correctly points out, there used to be a plant itself is what I am asking about. provision in the Criminal Code which stipulated Mr WELLS: The section says that a that, in respect of the whole range of charges, person must not wilfully and unlawfully including sexual offences against women, damage property. That is not qualified in any perjury and some other cases, the judge must way. The words bear their normal warn the jury that it was dangerous to convict commonsense meaning. Obviously, a pot on the uncorroborated evidence of the plant is a property. That section would not be complainant or of one person. That was a read down by reference to any other section. blanket legal rule which, in the case of women at least, stood as an insult to them. We took Mr BEANLAND: Does that mean that the decision to remove that blanket this does include the plant, and the other requirement—the statutory requirement—that section does not? Is that what the Attorney is the judge must warn the jury of the dangers of saying to me? That is the way I read it. I seek convicting on uncorroborated evidence, and some clarification in relation to that. It seems leave it to the judge in all the circumstances of 15 June 1995 12722 Legislative Assembly the case to determine whether or not to give a Mr FitzGerald: As long as I know you're warning. We now find that very often in perjury changing the law. It's not the same law. cases the judge will give that warning; but Mr WELLS: The new situation will be there may be circumstances in which, if the that it will be at the discretion of the judge. judge were to give such a warning, he would be skewing the case from one side to the Mr FitzGerald: I accept that you're other. For example, if it was just one person's changing the law. word against another, but there were all sorts Mr WELLS: There is an intention to do of other circumstantial pieces of evidence that and to leave the discretion with the judge. which tended to present one way or the other, Mr FitzGerald: Before you said there then it might not be appropriate for the judge wasn't any change; that there was already to give such a warning; so in that possibly rare blanket cover. circumstance the judge would exercise his or her right not to do so. Mr WELLS: I am sorry if I did not express myself sufficiently clearly for you to Mr FITZGERALD: I believe that the understand it. Attorney has erred in the statement that there is a blanket provision with regard to perjury Clause 204, as read, agreed to. and that covered the point that I raised. I do Clauses 205 to 230, as read, agreed to. not believe that it did. The existing Criminal Clause 231— Code covers that point very specifically. Under the present Code, the perjury section is Mr JOHNSON (1.54 a.m.): On page section 123. The punishment for perjury is set 131, under the heading "Owner of premises out in section 124, but under the heading inducing child under 16 to be on the premises "Evidence on charge of perjury", section 125 to be abused" beginning at line 24 the clause states— states— "A person cannot be convicted of "Maximum penalty— committing perjury or of counselling or (a) life imprisonment, if— procuring the commission of perjury upon (i) the child is a female under 12 the uncorroborated testimony of one years and the act is the crime of witness." having unlawful vaginal I contend that, if the Attorney is trying to say intercourse with a female under that there was a blanket provision that covered 16 . . ." this existing section, he is in error. I believe In my contribution to the second-reading that a specific clause was included, the same debate, I referred to clause 117, "Sexual clause—I believe that it is word perfect—in the assault", which refers to a maximum penalty of December 1994 draft, but it is missing from 14 years' imprisonment if the person who has the Bill that is before the Committee. been sexually assaulted is under 16 years or It has nothing to do with a judge's advice over 60 years. I ask: what is the difference at the trial. It simply states that a person between the provision in clause 231 and cannot be convicted on the uncorroborated rape? evidence of one witness. Mr WELLS: There may not be a Mr WELLS: I do not know whether we difference between what the honourable have got crossed wires or not. The Criminal member is thinking about and rape. If there is Code as it presently stands says— no such difference then rape would be "A person cannot be convicted of charged. If the fact situation constitutes rape committing perjury or of counselling or by virtue of the drafting of the rape provision, procuring the commission of perjury upon then rape could be charged. the uncorroborated testimony of one Mr JOHNSON: I cannot see the witness." difference in the two offences. It seems to me That is the rule of law as it is now. that there is a conflict in the sentencing. Mr FitzGerald: But you're taking that Mr WELLS: Do you mean that you do out of the Criminal Code now? not know the difference between rape and indecent behaviour of this kind? Mr WELLS: That is right. That has been taken out of the Criminal Code. Mr JOHNSON: I understand, but the point that I make—— Mr FitzGerald: You are changing the law? Mr WELLS: The difference is in consent: rape is sexual intercourse without Mr WELLS: Yes, absolutely. consent. Legislative Assembly 12723 15 June 1995

Clause 231, as read, agreed to. The Minister might say that that is ridiculous Clauses 232 to 236, as read, agreed to. and stupid—and I think it is—nevertheless, under the definition of this clause of the Clause 237— legislation relating to organised crime, it Mr FITZGERALD (1.57 a.m.): This certainly could apply. As ridiculous as it clause is quite different from the way it sounds, the Attorney-General could say to me, appears in the draft of December 1994. There "I would never authorise that and the Director must be a reason for changing it. Was the of Prosecutions would not authorise that December 1994 draft deficient in relation to prosecution." I would simply say that I am sure the clause "Procuring sexual acts by deception Mr Castorina believed that that would be the or coercion"? I mentioned this matter in my case for him, and he was fairly shocked to find contribution to the second-reading debate and out that it was not. So under this clause there I do not have that copy of the draft with me. are no guarantees. The Minister can tell me Was there an attempt to draft this clause that it gives some certainty. However, it does differently? In the draft, the clause was quite not give certainty. clear that it was by deception. I point out the I cannot help thinking that all the people difficulty of going from one piece of proposed who have criticised this clause are correct. The legislation to another piece of proposed Minister has had a lot of people looking at the legislation. The December 1994 draft was clause. With all the legal expertise that the extremely different; it was ludicrous. Minister has available, he could have redrafted Mr WELLS: We have redrafted this in the clause in a more adequate manner to response to criticisms by the Law Society. cope with organised crime rather than the way Clause 237, as read, agreed to. in which it has been drafted. Because of the manner in which the clause can be used, it is Clauses 238 to 270, as read, agreed to. quite alarming to see it drafted in this way. Clause 271— There is no point in saying that it cannot be used for all sorts of minor offences. The Mr BEANLAND (1.59 a.m.): This is the Minister might tell me it will not be. That is his first of the clauses on organised crime. Under view today, but who knows what happens the heading "When does a person engage in tomorrow? The Minister moves on; somebody organised crime" the clause states— else takes his place. I have seen this happen "271(1) A person engages in with Governments. I have seen Ministers organised crime if— come and go, and the replacement Ministers (a) the person commits an organised decide to do different things. crime offence on at least 3 separate One can say in this case that it would be occasions; and subject to public pressure. It might be one of (b) the organised crime offences form all the most borderline of cases. It might be a or part of a substantially planned and case that, under the Criminal Code, the organised activity carried out by the Director of Prosecutions is desperate because person with at least 1 other person." he cannot find another section under which to prosecute and decides to prosecute the crime The Attorney and the Government have as an offence which is not organised crime—or certainly copped some criticism about this what most people would perceive to be an clause. I note that prosecutions under this offence other than organised crime—under clause cannot proceed without the consent of this clause. the State law officer. The State law officer is the Attorney-General and, I think, it might be It might not be a two-up game. The the Director of Prosecutions. That clause might people concerned might be running chook be included to give people comfort but, of raffles, or something else on three separate course, it is cold comfort to someone like Mr occasions. However, the key is that the clause Castorina. I mention that, because, with states— respect, I do not think it is much comfort to "(a) the person commits an organised people. crime offence on at least 3 separate I can well understand why people occasions"; and expressed alarm and concern about this (b) the organised crime offences form all clause. Earlier, a member mentioned the or part of a substantially planned and playing of two-up. I am aware that people organised activity carried out by the have said that this could relate to a game of person with at least 1 other person." two-up played on three separate occasions. It All of the things that I am talking about are could be related to a whole host of activities. planned and organised and carried out by one 15 June 1995 12724 Legislative Assembly person with at least one other person. The which are stealing offences. Other offences more I look at the clause, the more I see that are also listed. So the discretion of the it leaves itself wide open to abuse. I am not Attorney-General or the Director of saying that the Minister is going to abuse it, or Prosecutions is an additional device. It does that the current Director of Prosecutions is not mean that the discretion can override that going to abuse it, but we have to look down list. Firstly, one has the list and then, if the the track. If there was ever a clause within this offences are occurring within that list, it is still legislation that could certainly be used in a necessary for the police to get over the fairly frightening manner, I believe that it is this additional hurdle of getting the agreement of clause. I have no alarm about it being used for the DP or the AG to prosecute under this real organised crime. Far from it. In fact, I clause. hope that it will be used for exactly that Mr BEANLAND: Following on from that, purpose. Nevertheless, it can be subject to I accept that "crime" is defined in Chapter 3, abuse, and I believe that that causes people Parts 1, 2 and 4, and the list also refers to alarm. I can well understand why a range of forgery and fraud. Also included in the list is people have expressed concern about this "unlawfully carrying on a lottery". That is why I publicly. One has only to read the clause to raised the issue of two-up and chook raffles. understand that simple situations could arise in which it can be used. An organised crime provision is making reference to a lottery. I think that the very The Minister can give me all the points I raised are certainly cause for alarm guarantees in the world and so can the current and concern. Director of Prosecutions. In due course, neither the Minister nor the Director of I was not exaggerating when I raised Prosecutions will be occupying those positions. those particular points. Far from it. I only wish Who knows what situations could arise? When that I were exaggerating, because then the this clause is used, events could overtake the concerns of people would be considerably intent of the legislation. I believe that this less. Unfortunately, that is not case. It is clause ought to be redrafted. I cannot believe contained in the legislation in black and white, that, with all the legal expertise available, a as are a number other matters that I hardly clause in that part of the legislation titled think should come within that clause. Certainly, "Organised crime" cannot be drafted in a the lottery provision is totally ridiculous. much more efficient and effective manner. Mr WELLS: The clause relates to a I would like to know what the Litigation breach of proposed section 303 of the Reform Commission said about it. I would like Criminal Code, which states— to see the written advice it gave. I am not "A person must not unlawfully open, concerned about the discussions that took keep or use a place to carry on a lottery." place. I am sure that every civil libertarian or anyone else with half a concern for liberty has We all know that organised crime sometimes to be concerned about the possible misuse of organises itself to conduct SP bookmaking this particular clause. and all sorts of other kinds of unlawful gambling. Therefore, it is necessary to follow Mr WELLS: The honourable member organised crime wherever it goes. for Indooroopilly is correct on two counts. If one were a civil libertarian, one would have a Mr ROWELL: I want to raise an issue in problem with this clause. He is also correct in regard to fraud. I refer to Part 4 of the saying that those matters should not be legislation. In the event of a small organisation subject to the discretion of the Minister of the issuing three cheques for which it did not have day. As he says, in the distant future it might the financial backing and the funds were not in be that somebody's discretion would be used its account, that small organisation may find inappropriately. I might say I am not aware of itself in breach of the provisions of this that having occurred with any of my legislation. I also mention subclause (j) of predecessors. However, I agree with the point clause 271, which refers to unlawfully carrying made by the honourable member. At the time out a lottery. If a football club sold tickets on we were drafting that clause, my thinking was three occasions around the streets for a chook the same as his. Consequently, we have raffle or something of that nature without included in the clause the list, which states— having the right licence, would that circumstance fall under proposed section 303 " 'organised crime offence' means of the Code, which refers to a lottery being a any of the following offences— scheme or device for the sale, gift, disposal, (a) a crime defined in chapter 3, distribution, of property depending on or parts 1, 2 and 4"— decided by lot or chance? Legislative Assembly 12725 15 June 1995

Mr WELLS: I understand your question. grapple with the concept of organised crime. The answer is, "Yes." However, clause 272(2) states— Mr Rowell: So in other words that club "A prosecution for the crime must not would be vulnerable to the provisions of this be started without a State law officer's section of the Act? consent." Mr WELLS: Maybe I do not understand That would mean obtaining the consent of the the member's question. Attorney-General or the Director of Mr ROWELL: I will go through it again. I Prosecutions. Extraordinarily, page 69 of the was referring to when a person engages in Explanatory Notes states— organised crime. The member for Indooroopilly "To ensure that only offences of the referred to subclause (a) of clause 271, which most serious kind are prosecuted under states— this provision, a prosecution for the crime "(a) The persons commits an organised of engaging in organised crime cannot be crime offence on at least 3 separate commenced without the consent of a occasions." State law officer." The definition of "organised crime offence" To say that the purpose of the subclause is to refers to fraud. If a small organisation issued ensure that only offences of the most serious three cheques for which it did not have the kind are prosecuted under this provision surely backing, and those cheques were in default is to admit that the Crown does not have when they came to be cashed, would that sufficient resources to deal with what, in its organisation be committing a crime of fraud? own words, it has portrayed as a very serious Mrs Woodgate: They're not very area of concern and for which it is introducing organised. this showcase legislation. Mr ROWELL: No, I am just saying that Mr WELLS: Rather, I think it is to cater this is a high possibility. This does happen. for the sorts of concerns raised by the Small organisations that have not the capacity honourable member's two colleagues who to fund those cheques, would they be have just spoken, that is, to ensure that committing fraud? people who are not actually engaged in organised crime or in, to use the words of the Mr WELLS: No. The provision states— statute, "substantially planned and organised ". . . form all or part of a substantially activity" do not get the sharp end of this planned and organised activity carried out provision when they ought to be prosecuted by the person with at least one other under a specific provision that has a person." determinant period of imprisonment. It is really For example, the small organisation which for the reasons that the colleagues of the issues three cheques that it is unable to honourable member were driving at. support is not engaged in a substantially Mr LINGARD: The Attorney-General planned and organised activity. It is just trying would have to agree that organised crime to inadvertently or advertently pass off more than any other criminal activity attempts cheques that it cannot honour. to influence and subvert those at the highest Mr ROWELL: Would the same apply to level of Government and administration. Other a football club or something of that nature that Western democracies have shown this is selling tickets in a chook raffle without a influence. Surely it is foolish to vest the power permit? to decide to prosecute organised crime based on its degree of seriousness in those law Mr WELLS: Yes, that is right. It would officers potentially the most likely to be the need to be a substantially planned and target of the most serious organised crime organised activity. Those words or words like influence? them have been interpreted in a number of American cases to preclude the targeting of Mr WELLS: All prosecutions are vested small enterprises of the type that the in the Director of Prosecutions. In State honourable member is speaking about. There Governments, the Attorney-General is has to be a substantially planned and frequently consulted by the Director of organised activity. Prosecutions. It is not dangerous to vest things in them; if their discretion has been Clause 271, as read, agreed to. corrupted by bribery or whatever it is that the Clause 272— honourable member is talking about might be Mr LINGARD (2.12 a.m.): The the connection with organised crime, the Government indicates that it is attempting to whole State would be so shot through with 15 June 1995 12726 Legislative Assembly corruption that he might as well pack up and (c) unlawful use or possession of a go home. The whole purpose of having a vehicle; or criminal law is premised on the assumption (d) receiving tainted property; or that the prosecuting authorities are going to be prosecuting the crooks. However, if that (e) a drugs misuse offence system slips up, we do have the CJC. punishable on conviction on indictment by not more than 15 Clause 272, as read, agreed to. years imprisonment. Clauses 273 and 274, as read, agreed to. (2) The court may decide the charge Clause 275— summarily. Mr BEANLAND (2.16 a.m.): I refer to (3) The court must consider all this clause because it is part of the drugs relevant circumstances in deciding misuse offences, that is, trafficking in a whether to decide the charge summarily, dangerous drug. I take it from the Explanatory including, for example— Notes that none of the penalties within the (a) whether or not the charged drug offences area have changed from the person wants the charge to be previous Drugs Misuse Act, nor have the decided summarily; and offences themselves. Is the whole process the (b) the nature and seriousness of same? the offence and whether the Mr WELLS: That is correct. court can adequately deal with Clause 275, as read, agreed to. it; and Clauses 276 to 319, as read, agreed to. (c) the effect on the person if the person is convicted, including, Clause 320— for example— Mr BEANLAND (2.17 a.m.): Clause 320 (i) the penalty that may be is headed, "When a charge for an indictable imposed; and offence may be decided summarily." I want to (ii) any detriment to the spend a moment examining this clause, person's reputation or because it is one that concerns the Opposition employment prospects; and greatly. In his reply, the Minister indicated that there was basically nothing to worry about; (d) whether or not the prosecution that it was a matter that the umpire, the wants the charge to be decided magistrate, would decide. The problem with summarily; and this whole section is that the umpire is both (e) whether the person is judge and jury when it comes to making a represented before the court by decision about whether a person will receive a legal practitioner. trial by jury in either the District or Supreme (4) In exercising its discretion under Courts. So it is the umpire, the magistrate, subsection (2), the court must take who will make this decision. into account that it should ordinarily I heard some comments yesterday about decide summarily a charge— various aspects of this clause that the courts (a) about property with a value of must consider. I want to start from scratch and not more than 84 penalty units; go through this clause, because it is important and that it is fully appreciated. In spite of what various members of the Government and the (b) not involving proof of actual Minister might indicate, the fact of the matter violence, or a threat of actual is that, at the end of the day, it is at the violence to anyone. discretion of the magistrate. The clause (5) If the court decides to decide the states— charge summarily, the court must— "This section applies if a person (a) write down the charge and read appears before a Magistrates Court it to the person; and charged with— (b) ask the person whether the (a) an indictable offence punishable person is guilty or not guilty as on conviction on indictment by charged; and not more than 7 years (c) decide the charge summarily. imprisonment; or (6) To decide the charge summarily, (b) burglary; or the court must use the same Legislative Assembly 12727 15 June 1995

procedure it uses to decide charges the point is that for a whole range of serious for simple offences under the offences the right of an accused person to a Justices Act 1886. trial by jury has been abolished, because (7) However, subsection (6) applies clearly those offences will be dealt with by a subject to any provision of this Code magistrate. This measure will mean a applied to a charge for an indictable reduction in costs for the Government. It will offence dealt with summarily. mean a reduction in the backlog of cases awaiting hearing by the District Court and (8) On conviction, the person is liable Supreme Court. I am sure that that will please to a maximum penalty of the lesser the Treasurer in particular. This measure will of the following— reduce the pressure for the appointment of (a) the maximum penalty that could additional judges. In the past, this have been imposed if the Government has been most reluctant to person had been convicted on appoint additional judges when they should indictment; have been appointed. This measure will also (b) 2 years imprisonment. allow more civil cases to be heard by those judges who would otherwise have been sitting (9) A Magistrates Court may start to in criminal jurisdiction. summarily decide the charge even if more than 2 years have passed There is also the matter of obtaining legal since the offence was committed. aid, which I raised previously. This move may create additional pressure for the Legal Aid (10) A Magistrates Court may, at any Office to provide representation in those cases time before the court imposes a that are heard summarily. Perhaps the present sentence, decide not to summarily position will continue, whereby legal aid is not decide the charge. provided for summary cases heard before the (11) A decision under subsection (2) Magistrates Court. If that is the case, then is a decision of law. there will be a significant saving in legal aid (12) If the person is summarily costs. This measure will also affect the Office convicted of the charge, the person of the Director of Prosecutions. A significant may appeal to the Court of Appeal saving will more than likely be made under section 421(a) on the ground there—unless the Government intends to that the Magistrates Court should not change the current position. The Government have decided the charge summarily." may argue that cost cutting is not its primary motivation and that it does have the accused's Proposed section 421(a) states that a interests at heart. The fact remains that the person may appeal— Government will save a pot of gold through "against the person's conviction on a this exercise. It has tried in a number of ways ground involving only an issue of law". to short-change the justice system, and this is The decision as to whether to try a matter one very successful means of achieving that summarily is at the discretion of the end. magistrate. A range of conditions is set down, What about the Police Prosecutions but nowhere does the clause say, Branch? Will it continue to prosecute some of "Magistrates must do this. Magistrates should the more serious offences, or will the Office of take this into account. Magistrates should take the Director of Prosecutions become involved that into account." I do not want to misquote in those cases? It can be expected that a the Attorney, but I believe that he said that it is great deal more representation will be sought for the umpire to decide. I agree with that. The by accused people who appear before the magistrate is the umpire, but that person acts Magistrates Court on those more serious as both judge and jury without an accused offences. The issues that I have raised must having the opportunity to go before the District be considered. Court or Supreme Court to be tried by a jury. One can read the various conditions for as A Government member interjected. long as one likes; they contain the words Mr BEANLAND: Apparently, "should", "may" and so forth, but the word Government members are not at all "must" does not appear once. At the end of concerned about whether people still have the the day, after taking into account all of the right to trial by jury for what are quite serious conditions set out in the clause, the decision offences. We are talking about indictable comes down to the magistrate. offences which are punishable by up to not The Attorney may cite cases from other more than seven years' imprisonment, States, or whatever else he wishes to do, but including burglary, unlawful use or possession 15 June 1995 12728 Legislative Assembly of a vehicle, receiving tainted property—or packet of screws from a hardware store, and fencing—and certain drug offences. The new that member had put in his pocket—— Code is allegedly intended to crack down on Mr Budd: Don't be silly. burglary offences. Yet those who receive tainted property—the very people we really Mr FITZGERALD: I am not being silly. need to crack down on—may be dealt with In such a scenario, that person would want the summarily. I can understand people's concern opportunity to defend his or her integrity to the about the new arrangement, because many maximum extent possible. drug offences are presently handled by police Mr Beattie: That is quite true; but the prosecutors in the Magistrates Court. We magistrate then has a discretion. could have ended up with a large increase in Mr FITZGERALD: If I were charged the number of such cases going to trial by jury. with something that I had not done, the However, I believe that it is really over the top evidence looked crook and I had to fight that to provide for so many of those offences to be charge, after this legislation is passed I would tried summarily before a magistrate. The case demand that I have the very rights that I have under consideration could be a serious one today. If the magistrate decides to hear my that affects a person's employment and their case summarily, I can appeal that lifestyle—— decision—— Time expired. Mr Beanland: On a point of law only. Mr WELLS: The civil liberties concerns Mr FITZGERALD:—but on the ground that the honourable member has raised are of a point of law only. So once the magistrate valid ones. These are matters on which honest has decided to hear my case summarily, and if minds may simply differ. The view of the I am found guilty, I can still appeal on the Government is that we do not need the courts ground of a point of law that my case should to be clogged up with lengthy trials of matters not have been heard summarily and I might such as wilful damage to a paper cup or being be granted a trial by jury. What is the good of in possession of a cockroach zapper having a trial by jury after the magistrate and suspected of having been stolen. everyone knows that the person is convicted? Mr Beattie: Or the theft of a rose bush. Members can understand that, because they are members of Parliament and their integrity Mr WELLS: Or stealing a rose bush; means everything to them. So that law will be because those kinds of cases diminish the changed from whenever this legislation comes access to justice of the rest of the community. into effect. This is an issue of access to justice. As the honourable member points out, it does What would happen if I was a humble represent a cost saving to Government to railway worker? Honourable members would avoid running such long trials. That is part of be aware of the tremendous pride that some the concern, but the important aspect from the ordinary people have, yet this legislation will point of view of the public is that the courts are take away what they believe is their right as a clogged up with those kinds of cases, and Queenslander. Under the law as it stands on they could be heard more expeditiously. A 16 June, they have those rights, yet when this simple and effective system is the system of law comes into effect, they will lose those letting the umpire decide it. All Governments rights. tend to respond eventually to the sorts of Mr Beattie: That's not right—maybe. concerns that led us to take that Mr FITZGERALD: Maybe! recommendation forward. Usually, they go down the track of New South Wales, Victoria Mr Beattie: The fact is you would most or the United Kingdom, whereby if the property likely end up in a jury trial. is worth less than a certain amount the case Mr FITZGERALD: The member said cannot be heard by the District Court in any that the humble railway worker who got picked circumstances; it is automatically heard by the up for having a packet of screws on him would Magistrates Court. That is not so here. It will most probably end up in the District Court. be possible for anybody to get a trial by jury; it That railway worker's pride and integrity would is just a matter of putting the points to the mean just as much to him as mine does to umpire. me; it is my living. Mr FITZGERALD: The Attorney cited Mr Bennett: It's the same as now, isn't cases involving damage to a paper cup and it? stealing a rose bush. If a member of Mr FITZGERALD: Yes, therefore it is Parliament were charged with stealing a very important. Government members trivialise Legislative Assembly 12729 15 June 1995 this clause by talking about rose bushes, honourable member that in this jurisdiction, paper cups and cockroach zappers. If I was under this proposed law alone, he would get a convicted of pinching a packet of screws from trial by jury; whereas in many other jurisdictions the local hardware store, it would be an he would not get a trial by jury. I am keen to indictment on my character for the rest of my try to accommodate honourable members life. It would have a severe impact on me. opposite, but I think this is probably the best Mr Beattie: As an MP you would get a we can do. You cannot really get a better jury trial. system than one which leaves the discretion with the unbiased person in the game, and Mr FITZGERALD: I would, but what the unbiased person in the game is the about the humble railway worker? He has just magistrate. as much pride as I do. The railway and council Mr BEANLAND: I rise in relation to this worker—the humble people—have just as clause again because the more I hear about it much right to their integrity as I have to mine. from the Minister, the more concerned I am. Under the Government's new law, they will He has indicated more and more that we lose their integrity. The law in Queensland is should be concerned about this clause. I do changing, and the people should be aware of not want my concerns to be seen as those of what that change will mean. a civil libertarian or anything else; they are Mr WELLS: I do not know whether I can simply the concerns of a representative of the satisfy the honourable member for Lockyer, people. At the end of the day, it is the people but I will do my best. If the honourable who will be concerned about this matter. We member inadvertently took a packet of screws are not talking about a paper cup trial. I am from a hardware store and walked out without talking about some very serious offences paying for them by virtue of the fact that he which magistrates can hear under this forgot and he was subsequently charged in proposal—offences such as indecently dealing New South Wales or Victoria or Great Britain, with a child under 16 years of age—that carry he would find that he would have no choices a maximum penalty of seven years' available to him; he would simply be charged imprisonment. and tried before a Magistrates Court. If the This clause covers a range of offences. same thing happened in Queensland, the Offences under the Drugs Misuse Act carry magistrate would be required to ask him penalties of up to 15 years and burglary whether he was prepared to be tried offences carry penalties of 14 years to life. We summarily. If he said "No", the magistrate are dealing with a range of burglary offences, would then have to consider whether or not he some of which will be very serious indeed, wanted to take the matter further. If the which the magistrate can decide to hear. magistrate did, the magistrate would then There is nothing in this legislation which says have to consider whether or not the charged that a magistrate cannot hear or must not person wants the charge to be decided hear these cases. I know that there are a summarily—and he has the answer of range of provisions, but at the end of the day "No"—and he might then very well go no the magistrate must take them all into further than that. He would then consider the account, and at the end of the day he is the nature and seriousness of the offence and umpire who makes that decision. whether the court can adequately deal with it. If the offence had been characterised to him The Attorney-General is certainly right; this as an offence of dishonesty, he might clause will save a lot of money—there is not consider it to be serious given all the much doubt about that—because there will be circumstances, especially the effect on the a huge range of offences that will move person if the person is convicted, including, for certainly from the District Court—and perhaps example, the penalty that may be imposed even some from the Supreme Court—down to and the detriment to the person's reputation the Magistrates Court. Some of those and employment prospects. Employment offences will be quite serious indeed. Sure, the prospects are important in this clause. An magistrate might have wide discretionary honourable member's reputation, of course, is powers, but it is the magistrate who will be important. Employment prospects are also both judge and jury and who will decide on affected if a manual worker takes away some whether a person will have a trial by jury or a nails. That is taken into consideration in regard trial heard by a magistrate. The court may stop to whether or not the prosecution wants the proceedings and decide the charge summarily charge to be decided summarily, and so forth. and run the trial as a committal proceeding— the Government has included those The magistrate has to take all of those clauses—but at the end of the day it is still the things into consideration. I put it to the magistrate who will make all these decisions. 15 June 1995 12730 Legislative Assembly

The only right of appeal will be through the grounds that the magistrate should not have Court of Appeal under section 421 on the decided the case summarily. The opportunity grounds of law. exists for people in that situation to have Whether one likes it or not, the Minister heard by the magistrate the case as to has very effectively moved a huge number of whether they should be heard by a magistrate. offences—and we are not talking about paper They will be heard on these points, and the cups here; we are talking about a very magistrate must exercise discretion with significant and serious range of offences— respect to the criteria in the Bill. If the from the superior courts back down to the magistrate does not, automatically the Magistrates Court. That will have enormous magistrate's discretion miscarries and any ramifications for the justice system of this conviction that was recorded by the magistrate State and certainly, as the Attorney-General would be set aside. Magistrates will be indicated, on the cost of justice to this solicitous to address the kinds of concerns the Government. I am concerned that the people honourable member for Lockyer and the will not receive justice. This legislation should honourable member for Indooroopilly have provide for a trial by jury if the accused so raised. I do not know what more I can say to wishes. That right of the accused is being satisfy them. This is the provision in the taken away. Western World by which people can get a trial by jury, compared with the other States of Mr FITZGERALD: I just want to make Australia and other jurisdictions that I have one point. Quite often, to people of very mentioned. humble means who have very little in the way of earthly possessions, their reputation is what Question—That clause 320, as read, be they own. Old-fashioned people who pay their agreed to—put; and the Committee divided— bills are of humble means; their integrity, pride AYES, 42—Ardill, Barton, Beattie, Bennett, Bird, and name are the only things they have and Braddy, Briskey, Campbell, Clark, D'Arcy, Davies, they will defend them to the end of the earth. Dollin, Edmond, Elder, Fenlon, Foley, Gibbs, Hamill, They have that right at present in Queensland. Hayward, Hollis, McElligott, McGrady, Mackenroth, This Government may take some of those Nunn, Nuttall, Palaszczuk, Pearce, Pitt, Power, rights away from those people if they find Purcell, Pyke, Robertson, Rose, Smith, Sullivan T. B., Szczerbanik, Vaughan, Welford, themselves charged with only a relatively Wells, Woodgate Tellers: Livingstone, Budd minor offence. NOES, 27—Beanland, Connor, Cooper, Davidson, Mr WELLS: I take on board the point Elliott, FitzGerald, Gamin, Gilmore, Grice, Healy, that the honourable member for Lockyer Horan, Johnson, Lester, Lingard, Littleproud, made. The statute that we are proposing does Malone, Perrett, Quinn, Rowell, Santoro, Simpson, provide for that—and not only the nature and Slack, Stephan, Turner, Watson Tellers: Springborg, seriousness of the offence but also the effect Laming on the person if the person is convicted. The Resolved in the affirmative. magistrate must hear the person on this matter. If the magistrate subsequently decides Progress reported. against that person, there is the capacity for The House adjourned at 2.49 a.m. an appeal to the Court of Appeal on the (Friday).