DOCSLIB.ORG

Alert Digest No 3 of 2014

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Alert Digest No 3 of 2014 No. 3 of 2014 Tuesday, 11 March 2014 On the following Bills Corrections Amendment (Parole) Bill 2014 Education and Training Reform Amendment (Registration of Early Childhood Teachers and Victorian Institute of Teaching) Bill 2014 Fences Amendment Bill 2014 Gambling and Liquor Legislation Amendment (Reduction of Red Tape) Bill 2014 Honorary Justices Bill 2014 Mental Health Bill 2014 Transport (Safety Schemes Compliance and Enforcement) Bill 2014 Vexatious Proceedings Bill 2014 aalertlert iinside.ainside.ai 1 220/08/20130/08/2013 11:13:31:13:31 PPMM The Committee Chairperson Deputy Chairperson Ms Ann Barker MLA Mr Michael Gidley MLA Hon. Richard Dalla-Riva MLC Hon. Chrisne Campbell MLA Member for Oakleigh Member for Mount Waverley Member for Eastern Metropolitan Member for Pascoe Vale Mr Don Nardella MLA Dr Bill Sykes MLA Mr Graham Wa MLA Member for Melton Member for Benalla Member for Burwood C Parliament House, Spring Street M Melbourne Victoria 3002 Commiee Staff Y Telephone: (03) 8682 2895 Mr Andrew Homer, Senior Legal Adviser CM Facsimilie: (03) 8682 2858 Ms Helen Mason, Legal Adviser - Regulaons Email: [email protected] Mr Simon Dinsbergs, Business Support Officer MY Web: www.parliament.vic.gov.au/sarc Ms Sonya Caruana, Office Manager CY CMY K Terms of Reference - Scrutiny of Bills The funcons of the Scruny of Acts and Regulaons Commiee are – (a) to consider any Bill introduced into the Council or the Assembly and to report to the Parliament as to whether the Bill directly or indirectly – (i) trespasses unduly upon rights or freedoms; (ii) makes rights, freedoms or obligaons dependent upon insufficiently defined administrave powers; (iii) makes rights, freedoms or obligaons dependent upon non-reviewable administrave decisions; (iv) unduly requires or authorises acts or pracces that may have an adverse effect on personal privacy within the meaning of the InformaƟon Privacy Act 2000; (v) unduly requires or authorises acts or pracces that may have an adverse effect on privacy of health informaon within the meaning of the Health Records Act 2001; (vi) inappropriately delegates legislave power; (vii) insufficiently subjects the exercise of legislave power to parliamentary scruny; (viii) is incompable with the human rights set out in the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilies; (b) to consider any Bill introduced into the Council or the Assembly and to report to the Parliament – (i) as to whether the Bill directly or indirectly repeals, alters or varies secon 85 of the ConsƟtuƟon Act 1975, or raises an issue as to the jurisdicon of the Supreme Court; (ii) if a Bill repeals, alters or varies secon 85 of the ConsƟtuƟon Act 1975, whether this is in all the circumstances appropriate and desirable; (iii) if a Bill does not repeal, alter or vary secon 85 of the ConsƟtuƟon Act 1975, but an issue is raised as to the jurisdicon of the Supreme Court, as to the full implicaons of that issue; Parliamentary CommiƩees Act 2003, secon 17 Table of Contents Page Nos. Alert Digest No. 3 of 2014 Corrections Amendment (Parole) Bill 2014 1 Fences Amendment Bill 2014 11 Gambling and Liquor Legislation Amendment (Reduction of Red Tape) Bill 2014 13 Honorary Justices Bill 2014 14 Mental Health Bill 2014 15 Transport (Safety Schemes Compliance and Enforcement) Bill 2014 18 Vexatious Proceedings Bill 2014 20 Ministerial Correspondence Education and Training Reform Amendment (Registration of Early Childhood Teachers and Victorian Institute of Teaching) Bill 2014 25 Appendices 1 – Index of Bills in 2014 29 2 – Committee Comments classified by Terms of Reference 31 3 – Ministerial Correspondence 2014 33 i Useful information Role of the Committee The Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee is an all‐party Joint House Committee, which examines all Bills and subordinate legislation (regulations) introduced or tabled in the Parliament. The Committee does not make any comments on the policy merits of the legislation. The Committee’s terms of reference contain principles of scrutiny that enable it to operate in the best traditions of non‐partisan legislative scrutiny. These traditions have been developed since the first Australian scrutiny of Bills committee of the Australian Senate commenced scrutiny of Bills in 1982. They are precedents and traditions followed by all Australian scrutiny committees. Non‐policy scrutiny within its terms of reference allows the Committee to alert the Parliament to the use of certain legislative practices and allows the Parliament to consider whether these practices are necessary, appropriate or desirable in all the circumstances. The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 provides that the Committee must consider any Bill introduced into Parliament and report to the Parliament whether the Bill is incompatible with human rights. Interpretive use of Parliamentary Committee reports Section 35 (b)(iv) of the Interpretation of Legislation Act 1984 provides – In the interpretation of a provision of an Act or subordinate instrument consideration may be given to any matter or document that is relevant including, but not limited to, reports of Parliamentary Committees. When may human rights be limited Section 7 of the Charter provides – Human rights – what they are and when they may be limited – (2) A human right may be subject under law only to such reasonable limits as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom, and taking into account all relevant factors including— (a) the nature of the right; and (b) the importance of the purpose of the limitation; and (c) the nature and extent of the limitation; and (d) the relationship between the limitation and its purpose; and (e) any less restrictive means reasonably available to achieve the purpose that the limitation seeks to achieve Glossary and Symbols ‘Assembly’ refers to the Legislative Assembly of the Victorian Parliament ‘Charter’ refers to the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 ‘Council’ refers to the Legislative Council of the Victorian Parliament ‘DPP’ refers to the Director of Public Prosecutions for the State of Victoria ‘human rights’ refers to the rights set out in Part 2 of the Charter ‘IBAC’ refers to the Independent Broad‐based Anti‐corruption Commission ‘penalty units’ refers to the penalty unit fixed from time to time in accordance with the Monetary Units Act 2004 and published in the government gazette (as from 1 July 2013 one penalty unit equals $144.36 ) ‘Statement of Compatibility’ refers to a statement made by a member introducing a Bill in either the Council or the Assembly as to whether the provisions in a Bill are compatible with Charter rights ‘VCAT’ refers to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal [ ] denotes clause numbers in a Bill ii Alert Digest No. 3 of 2014 Corrections Amendment (Parole) Bill 2014 Introduced 18 February 2014 Second Reading Speech 18 February 2014 House Legislative Council Member introducing Bill Hon Edward O’Donohue MLC Portfolio responsibility Minister for Corrections Background In November 1988 the Supreme Court sentenced Julian Knight to seven life sentences with a non‐ parole period of 27 years. The prisoner had pleaded guilty to seven counts of murder and 46 counts of attempted murder following a shooting rampage in Clifton Hill on 9 August 1987. The rampage left 7 dead and another 19 persons seriously injured. In his sentencing remarks the presiding judge, Mr Justice Hampel described the offending as ‘one of the worst massacres in Australian history’.1 At the time of sentencing the prisoner was 19 years old. The prisoner will be eligible to apply for parole in May 2014. Purpose The Bill inserts a new section 74AA2 (‘the amendment’) in the Corrections Act 1986 to provide for additional conditions for the making of a parole order for the prisoner Julian Knight. The Bill also provides that the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (‘the Charter’) has no application to the amendment and specifically, that section 31(7) of the Charter (expiry of the override after 5 years) does not apply to the amendment. The Committee notes that the Minister has made an override statement supporting an override declaration in the course of the second reading speech. 1 R v Knight [1989] VR 705. Also available online at <http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VicRp/1989/62.html> 2 74AA. Conditions for making a parole order for Julian Knight (1) The Board must not make a parole order under section 74 in respect of the prisoner Julian Knight unless an application for the order is made to the Board by or on behalf of the prisoner. (2) The application must be lodged with the Secretary of the Board. (3) After considering the application, the Board may make an order under section 74 in respect of the prisoner Julian Knight if, and only if, the Board— (a) is satisfied (on the basis of a report prepared by the Secretary to the Department of Justice) that the prisoner— (i) is in imminent danger of dying, or is seriously incapacitated, and as a result he no longer has the physical ability to do harm to any person; and (ii) has demonstrated that he does not pose a risk to the community; and (b) is further satisfied that, because of those circumstances, the making of the order is justified. (4) The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 has no application to this section. (5) Without limiting subsection (4), section 31(7) of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 does not apply to this section. (6) In this section a reference to the prisoner Julian Knight is a reference to the Julian Knight who was sentenced by the Supreme Court in November 1988 to life imprisonment for each of 7 counts of murder.".
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Knight V Commonwealth of Australia (No 3)
    SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY Case Title: Knight v Commonwealth of Australia (No 3) Citation: [2017] ACTSC 3 Hearing Dates: 4, 7 May, 3 August, 3 November 2015 Decision Date: 13 January 2017 Before: Mossop AsJ Decision: See [233] Catchwords: LIMITATION OF ACTIONS – Application for extension of time – Claim for damages arising out of assault and negligence – Multiple incidents giving rise to claims – Incidents occurred while plaintiff was a cadet at the Royal Military College, Duntroon – Plaintiff subsequently sentenced and imprisoned for separate incident – 27-year delay in commencing proceedings – Whether Limitation Act 1985 (ACT) s 36 permitting the grant of an extension of time applies – Whether an explanation for the delay existed – Whether just and reasonable to grant extension of time – Consideration s 36(3) considerations – Meaning of disability for the purposes of s 36(3)(d) – Broader significance in relation to abuse in the armed services – Significance of absence of other remedies – Proportionality between damages and cost and effort associated with running claim – Whether proceedings amount to abuse of process – Whether use of proceedings as a means of achieving an interstate transfer predominant purpose of bringing proceedings – application dismissed Legislation Cited: Civil Law (Wrongs) Amendment 2003 (No 2) (ACT), s 58 Corrections Act 1986 (Vic), s 74AA Corrections Amendment (Parole) Act 2014 (Vic) Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT), s 244 Interpretation of Legislation Act 1984 (Vic) Legislation
    [Show full text]
  • Caged Untold
    Contents ENTER THE OCTOGON: D- DIVISION YARDS, FIRST SKIRMISH/FIRST BLOOD. Firstly don�t pre-warn your enemies of your intentions. THE CHOOK PEN: THE PORTABLES OCTOGON, BLINDSHOT: BANG RIGHT BETWEEN THE EYES! FRANK WAGHORN BOILED BEECHWORTH VIOLENCE. B.B.Q. PAEDAPHILE FIZZLED! GEELONG JAIL �RAMBO �PILLED UP� GEELONG JAIL WAS MINE FOR AN HOUR ARARAT JAIL, OUTBOXED! BEANS BY ALL MEANZ! MY BEST FIGHT EVER! Raw, ferocious, blood, sweat and stiches! AT WAR WITH CHOPPER B �DIVISION PENTRIDGE 1990; THE OCTOGON! PAYROLL ICE PICKED! BANG ON CUE! UNLUCKY FOR SOME, PICK OF THE HAT! JULIAN KNIGHT, BANG. LIGHTS OUT NIGHT! Not a word was uttered from him at all. PETER GIBB: I did make an impression on him. KUNG-FOOL LEWIS CAINE. TUNNEL VISION, PATRICK MILLS, BECOMES AIR BORNE! LEGAL VISIT TERMINATED, WASN�T ME! TED EASTMOND MERRY X-MAS TED! TED DEMANDS ME CHARGED HE IS PISSED! DHJANGO: LETS PLAY! SPLIT DECISION! RUNNERS LENT, I WOULD FIGHT FOR. CHEAP SHOT! SMOKE SIGNALS! POT PREDATORS! EXAMPLES MADE, JUST BUSINESS! SPEARED, KOORI PUNISHMENT! HALF TIME HUDDLE! COMPLY OR BE GASSED! GOULBURN YARDS, DEADLY TERRAIN! Attack on sight were orders from every yard! CANTEEN UP! WEAPONS ORDERED! SUNDAYS LOCK N LOAD, NO CHURCH SERVICE! LOCKED IN THE OCTOGON LIVE BAIT! ROCKING TO GHOST TUNES.COMBAT MODE! DUDS, FIZZLED THREATS BUNKER CONTROLLED ATTACK! HUMAN CURTAIN DRAWN OUT COLD! NOT ALL HAPPY FATWAH ME VS THE LEB YARD SOLO! ALL IN RECON COMES UNDONE! GOULBURN RIOT KICKS OFF! CAGE FIGHTING IN TRANSIT NO REFS! C- CLASSO BUS RIDE CANCELLED, ONBOARD CONTRABAND FOUND. STEPPO; ARMED TO PLAY NINJA TURTLE SEX OFFENDERS were NOT welcome! SNAKE PIT! GAVIN PRESTON: GAVS VERBAL CANT FIGHT! PASQUALE BARBARO.
    [Show full text]
  • Postmaster & the Merton Record 2017
    Postmaster & The Merton Record 2017 Merton College Oxford OX1 4JD Telephone +44 (0)1865 276310 www.merton.ox.ac.uk Contents College News Features Records Edited by Merton in Numbers ...............................................................................4 A long road to a busy year ..............................................................60 The Warden & Fellows 2016-17 .....................................................108 Claire Spence-Parsons, Duncan Barker, The College year in photos Dr Vic James (1992) reflects on her most productive year yet Bethany Pedder and Philippa Logan. Elections, Honours & Appointments ..............................................111 From the Warden ..................................................................................6 Mertonians in… Media ........................................................................64 Six Merton alumni reflect on their careers in the media New Students 2016 ............................................................................ 113 Front cover image Flemish astrolabe in the Upper Library. JCR News .................................................................................................8 Merton Cities: Singapore ...................................................................72 Undergraduate Leavers 2017 ............................................................ 115 Photograph by Claire Spence-Parsons. With MCR News .............................................................................................10 Kenneth Tan (1986) on his
    [Show full text]
  • Active Shooter: Recommendations and Analysis for Risk Mitigation
    . James P. O’Neill . Police Commissioner . John J. Miller . Deputy Commissioner of . Intelligence and . Counterterrorism ACTIVE SHOOTER James R. Waters RECOMMENDATIONS AND ANALYSIS Chief of Counterterrorism FOR RISK MITIGATION 2016 EDITION AS RELEASED BY THE NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................................2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................3 RECENT TRENDS ........................................................................................................................6 TRAINING & AWARENESS CHALLENGE RESPONSE .................................................................................... 6 THE TARGETING OF LAW ENFORCEMENT & MILITARY PERSONNEL: IMPLICATIONS FOR PRIVATE SECURITY ........ 7 ATTACKERS INSPIRED BY A RANGE OF IDEOLOGIES PROMOTING VIOLENCE ................................................... 8 SOCIAL MEDIA PROVIDES POTENTIAL INDICATORS, SUPPORTS RESPONSE .................................................... 9 THE POPULARITY OF HANDGUNS, RIFLES, AND BODY ARMOR NECESSITATES SPECIALIZED TRAINING .............. 10 BARRICADE AND HOSTAGE-TAKING REMAIN RARE OCCURRENCES IN ACTIVE SHOOTER EVENTS .................... 10 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................11 POLICY .........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Digital Culture Media and Sport Committee
    ELECTORAL MATTERS COMMITTEE Inquiry into the Impact of Social Media on Elections and Electoral Administration Melbourne—Thursday, 19 November 2020 (via videoconference) MEMBERS Mr Lee Tarlamis—Chair Ms Wendy Lovell Mrs Bev McArthur—Deputy Chair Mr Andy Meddick Ms Lizzie Blandthorn Mr Cesar Melhem Mr Matthew Guy Mr Tim Quilty Ms Katie Hall Dr Tim Read Thursday, 19 November 2020 Electoral Matters Committee 41 WITNESS Mr Julian Knight, MP, Chair, Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee, UK Parliament. The CHAIR: I declare open the public hearing for the Electoral Matters Committee Inquiry into the Impact of Social Media on Elections and Electoral Administration. I would like to begin this hearing by respectfully acknowledging the Aboriginal peoples, the traditional custodians of the various lands each of us are gathered on today, and pay my respects to their ancestors, elders and families. I particularly welcome any elders or community members who are here today to impart their knowledge of this issue to the committee or who are watching the broadcast of these proceedings. I welcome Julian Knight, MP, Chair of the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee at the UK Parliament. I am Lee Tarlamis, Chair of the committee and a Member for South Eastern Metropolitan Region. The other members of the committee here today are Bev McArthur, our Deputy Chair and a Member for Western Victoria; the Honourable Wendy Lovell, a Member for Northern Victoria; Andy Meddick, a Member for Western Victoria; and Dr Tim Read, the Member for Brunswick. All evidence taken by this committee is protected by parliamentary privilege; therefore you are protected against any action in Australia for what you say here today.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix I Submissions to the Investigation Panel
    INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION INTO THE MANAGEMENT AND OPERATION OF VICTORIA’S PRIVATE PRISONS October 2000 Page 119 Appendix I Submissions to the Investigation Panel Name Position Organisation (where applicable) Kevin Lewis Managing Director Australasian Correctional Management Anthony Calabro Executive Director Australian Community Support Organisation Dennis O’Neill Chief Executive Officer Australian Council for Infrastructure Development Limited Michael Dennis Barwon Prison Julian Knight Barwon Prison Liz Curran Executive Officer Catholic Commission for Justice, Development and Peace Fr Grant O’Neill Chaplain Catholic Prison Ministry Dr Bronwyn Naylor Centre for the Study of Privatisation and Public Martine Marich Accountability, Law Faculty, Monash Gail Hubble University Karen Batt Branch Secretary Community and Public Sector Union John Griffin Chief Executive CORE – the Public Correctional Enterprise Richard Bourke Secretary Criminal Bar Association Rev Judy Redman Outreach Ministries Coordinator Criminal Justice Chaplains’ Advisory Committee Maartje Van-der-Vlies Criminologist (private) Ray Griffiths Director East Gippsland Institute of TAFE Kate Lawrence Corrections Working Group Federation of Community Legal Centres (Vic) Incorporated Karen Taylor Flat Out Marcus Williams Co-ordinator Footscray Community Legal Centre Michael Burt Chief Executive Officer Forensicare Stephen Masterson Fulham Correctional Centre Greg Welsh Fulham Correctional Centre Bill Henebery Chairman Fulham Correctional Centre Advisory Group Jim Pennell Member Fulham
    [Show full text]
  • The August 12, 1966, Issue of Time Magazine Led with a Story of National
    CHAPTER 19 Going Berserk he August 12, 1966, issue of Time magazine led with a story of national T pride—the wedding of Luci Baines Johnson, daughter of President Lyndon and Mrs. Lady Bird Johnson. Americans certainly love a wedding, but appar- ently they are more fascinated by murder. The presidential wedding was uncer- emoniously upstaged by a story of national sorrow. The cover photo of Time highlighted another Texan, Charles Whitman. On August 1, 1966, Whitman had climbed atop the 307-foot tower on the campus of the University of Texas in Austin and had opened fire on the campus from a vantage point behind the tower’s huge clock. Ninety-one bloody minutes later, 14 people were dead or dying. Thirty more lay injured in a 16-block area surrounding the tower; strewn with casualties, it looked more like a war zone than a college campus. Another victim of Whitman’s rampage was the fetus of a woman 8 months pregnant that was stillborn. In addition to these casualties, Whitman had killed his mother and his wife the night before, and Whitman himself was gunned down by a team of four officers at the top of the tower. To those who knew Charlie casually, he was the all-American boy, cer- tainly not the popular image of a deadly killer. A committed and hardwork- ing student, he had earned all As during his final semester at the University of Texas; over his entire college career as an architectural engineering major, his average was in the B range. He also seemed to be a friendly and caring fellow.
    [Show full text]
  • Active Shooter Recommendations and Analysis for Risk Mitigation
    New York City Police Department Active Shooter Recommendations and Analysis for Risk Mitigation Raymond W. Kelly Police Commissioner Table of Contents Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………………....ii Part I: Introduction…………………………………………………….………................1 Part II: Recommendations………………………………………………………..………2 Part III: Analysis …………………….…………………………………………………..4 Part IV: Analytic Methodology …………………………………………………….........9 Appendix: Compendium of Active Shooter Incidents - Office Buildings……………………………………………………………...12 - Open Commercial……………………………………………………………29 - Factories and Warehouses……………………………………………………61 - Schools……………………………………………………………………….78 - Other………………………………………………………………………..151 i Acknowledgements This report was prepared by the Counterterrorism Bureau of the New York City Police Department (NYPD), led by Deputy Commissioner Richard Daddario and Assistant Chief James R. Waters. The drafting of this report was a collaborative effort. The various authors and subject-matter experts include: Sgt. Richard Alvarez, Det. John Andersen, Sgt. Christopher Biddle, Lt. Stephenie Clark, Det. Joseph Cotter, Ryan Merola, Det. Peter Montella, Peter Patton, and Capt. Michael Riggio. In addition, NYPD Intelligence Research Specialists Aviva Feuerstein and Nathaniel Young, Det. Raymond McPartland, and Dr. Evan Levine, Chief Scientist for the Office of Risk Management and Analysis at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, made extraordinary contributions to this report; the completion of this work is due largely to their efforts. Active Shooter
    [Show full text]
  • Irreducible Life Sentences, Craig Minogue and the Capacity of Human Rights Charters to Make a Difference I Introduction
    484 UNSW Law Journal Volume 43(2) IRREDUCIBLE LIFE SENTENCES, CRAIG MINOGUE AND THE CAPACITY OF HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTERS TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE ANDREW DYER* Certain commentators have recently doubted whether, as a normative matter, an irreducible life sentence will always breach an offender’s human rights. This article argues that it will. Such commentators ignore the fact that certain punishments are ‘inhuman or degrading’ however proportionate they are, and however much suffering they cause. After noting that there is a clear trend against irreducible life sentences in Europe, the article then contends that a comparison of the relevant European jurisprudence with some recent decisions of the High Court of Australia demonstrates that charters of rights can improve protections for prisoners against laws that objectify and exclude them. The Victorian government’s recent disapplication of its charter for the purposes of legislation that removes the possibility of parole from certain named prisoners, however, also indicates that, if future Australian charters are properly to protect prisoners’ rights, they might have to be designed differently from existing Australian charters. I INTRODUCTION In Minogue v Victoria (‘Minogue (Scope Challenge)’),1 five High Court Justices suggested that, if the defendant were to impose an irreducible life sentence on a criminal offender, it would breach section 10(b) of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic) (‘Victorian Charter’), which prohibits, relevantly, ‘cruel, inhuman or degrading’ punishments. That provision, their Honours observed, is ‘in substantially the same terms’2 as article 3 of the Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (‘ECHR’).3 In Vinter v United Kingdom (‘Vinter’),4 they continued,5 the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (‘ECtHR’) held to be contrary to that article a life sentence that gave prisoners the prospect of release * Colin Phegan Senior Lecturer, University of Sydney Law School.
    [Show full text]
  • Wednesday, 25 March 1998 (A) That Community Donations Purchased the Land on Which the Hospital Is Built; the SPEAKER (Hon
    NOTICES OF MOTION Wednesday. 25 March 1998 ASSEMBLY 631 Wednesday, 25 March 1998 (a) that community donations purchased the land on which the hospital is built; The SPEAKER (Hon. S. J. Plowman) took the chair at (b) the maternity ward was financed by a bequest from a 10.03 a.m. and read the prayer. local resident, Mr Doug Rowe; and The SPEAKER - Order! Before proceeding with (c) a large proportion of beds and equipment in the normal business, I wish to advise the house that last hospital were paid for by charitable donations from the night the Chair erred in relation to the incorporation of senior hospital auxiliary, the junior hospital auxiliary, documents by the honourable member for Ripon. The the kiosk auxiliary, and other organisations. Chair should always ask whether leave is given for the The SPEAKER - Order! The honourable member incorporation. The Chair did not do so last night. I has moved a motion which the Chair would like to apologise to the honourable member for Footscray, examine. I am not sure whether it should have been two who was in charge of opposition business. Any member motions or one. It may have to be split into two separate may say, 'Leave refused', and leave will then not be motions. granted. Further notices of motion given. While I am talking about this matter it is worth my referring to the system for the incorporation of documents. If a member wishes to incorporate PETITIONS documents, the documents must first be presented to the Chair for approval, technical advice must be sought The Clerk - I have received the following petitions from Hansard as to whether the incorporation is for presentation to Parliament: practicable and then the documents must be made available to the person in the Chair during the debate.
    [Show full text]
  • A Brief History of Australia
    A Br i e f Hi s t o r y o f Au s t r A l i A A Br i e f Hi s t o r y o f Au s t r A l i A BA r ba r A A. We s t w i t h Fr a n c e s t. Mu r p h y A Brief History of Australia Copyright © 2010 by Barbara A. West All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage or retrieval systems, without permission in writing from the publisher. For information contact: Facts On File, Inc. An imprint of Infobase Publishing 132 West 31st Street New York NY 10001 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data West, Barbara A., 1967– A brief history of Australia / Barbara A. West with Frances T. Murphy. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-8160-7885-1 (acid-free paper) 1. Australia—History. I. Murphy, Frances T. II. Title. DU108.W47 2010 994—dc22 2009031925 Facts On File books are available at special discounts when purchased in bulk quantities for businesses, associations, institutions, or sales promotions. Please call our Special Sales Department in New York at (212) 967-8800 or (800) 322-8755. You can find Facts On File on the World Wide Web at http://www.factsonfile.com Excerpts included herewith have been reprinted by permission of the copyright holders; the author has made every effort to contact copyright holders.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking the Reporting of the Mass Random Shooting – Or Is It an Autogenic Massacre?
    Edith Cowan University Research Online ECU Publications Post 2013 2015 Rethinking the reporting of the mass random shooting – or is it an autogenic massacre? Glynn Greensmith Lelia Green Edith Cowan University Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ecuworkspost2013 Part of the Communication Commons Greensmith,G.F., Green, L.R. (2015), Rethinking the reporting of the mass random shooting – or is it an autogenic massacre? In Proceedings of the Australian and New Zealand Communication Association conference: Rethinking communication, space and identity. (pp. 1 - 10). Queenstown, New Zealand. Available here This Conference Proceeding is posted at Research Online. https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ecuworkspost2013/2447 Rethinking the reporting of the mass random shooting – or is it an autogenic massacre? Glynn Greensmith, Curtin University (Australia), Lelia Green, Edith Cowan University (Australia), Abstract The crime of the mass random shooting seems frighteningly common, yet around the world there are probably no more than about 26 per year: one per fortnight. The apparent randomness of the crime is one of the aspects which assures it of its publicity. Another is the traditional practice on the part of the gunman (and they are all men) of making a statement about his motives, or leaving a room or a box or a website of his grievances, to be uncovered and wondered at. The media’s focus on the genesis and impact of each mass random shooting is in some ways understandable, but it is at the expense of addressing the more common, and more preventable, non-random mass killings such as the murder suicides when a father ‘annihilates’ his family before turning his gun upon himself .
    [Show full text]