|
senate vote 2022-12-01#11
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2022-12-02 13:04:45
|
Title
Bills — Restoring Territory Rights Bill 2022; in Committee- Restoring Territory Rights Bill 2022 - in Committee - Limitation of power
Description
<p class="speaker">Jacinta Nampijinpa Price</p><p>by leave—I move amendments (1) and (2) on sheet 1764 together:</p>-
- The majority voted against [amendments](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2022-12-01.426.2) introduced by Northern Territory [Jacinta Nampijinpa Price](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/nt/jacinta_nampijinpa_price) (Country Liberal Party), which means they failed.
- ### What do the amendments do?
- Senator Nampijinpa Price [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2022-12-01.426.2):
- > *The purpose of the Restoring Territory Rights Bill 2022 is to amend the Australian Capital Territory (Self-Government) Act 1988 and the Northern Territory (Self-Government) Act 1978 to remove the provisions currently preventing the territories from passing legislation which would allow for voluntary assisted dying. The bill would not legalise that in either of the territories but rather would allow the legislative assemblies of the ACT and the NT to pass laws allowing for VAD. Despite what the Labor Northern Territory and federal House of Representatives members have portrayed of me publicly, I do support the bill and am doing my job—which they should note how to better do themselves—in making a bad bill better for the Territory. I'll say this again: I absolutely support the rights of Territorians. The proposed amendments, drafted by the parliamentary clerk, have been developed to ensure that the exact restraints that are currently operative in state law are applied in the Territory, because we have some of the most vulnerable communities and people in Australia.*
- ### Why are the major parties split on how to vote?
- This was a [free vote](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/help/faq#free) (also known as a conscience vote), which means our senators voted according to their own beliefs rather than voting along party lines.
- ### Amendment text
- > *(1) Schedule 1, item 1, page 3 (lines 4 and 5), omit the item, substitute:*
- >
- >> *1 Subsections 23(1A) and (1B)*
- >>
- >> *Repeal the subsections, substitute:*
- >>
- >> *(1A) The Assembly has no power to make laws permitting or having the effect of permitting (whether subject to conditions or not) the form of intentional killing of another called euthanasia (which includes mercy killing), or the assisting of a person to terminate the person's life, in circumstances where:*
- >>
- >>> *(a) the person whose life is to be terminated is under 18 years of age; or*
- >>>
- >>> *(b) the euthanasia is performed or the assistance is provided solely on the ground that the person whose life is to be terminated has:*
- >>>
- >>>> *(i) a disability (within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992); or*
- >>>>
- >>>> *(ii) a mental impairment (within the meaning of the Criminal Code).*
- >>
- >> *(1B) Subsection (1A) does not limit the power of the Assembly to make laws with respect to:*
- >>
- >>> *(a) the withdrawal or withholding of medical or surgical measures for prolonging the life of a patient, but not so as to permit the intentional killing of a person who is under 18 years of age; and*
- >>>
- >>> *(b) medical treatment in the provision of palliative care to a dying patient, but not so as to permit the intentional killing of a person who is under 18 years of age; and*
- >>>
- >>> *(c) the appointment of an agent by a patient who is authorised to make decisions about the withdrawal or withholding of treatment; and*
- >>>
- >>> *(d) the repealing of legal sanctions against attempted suicide.*
- >
- > *(2) Schedule 1, item 2, page 3 (lines 7 and 8), omit the item, substitute:*
- >
- >> *2 Section 50A*
- >>
- >> *Repeal the section, substitute:*
- >>
- >> *50A Law s concerning euthanasia*
- >>
- >> *(1) Subject to this section the power of the Legislative Assembly conferred by section 6 in relation to the making of laws does not extend to the making of laws which permit or have the effect of permitting (whether subject to conditions or not) the form of intentional killing of another called euthanasia (which includes mercy killing), or the assisting of a person to terminate the person's life, in circumstances where:*
- >>
- >>> *(a) the person whose life is to be terminated is under 18 years of age; or*
- >>>
- >>> *(b) the euthanasia is performed or the assistance is provided solely on the ground that the person whose life is to be terminated has:*
- >>>
- >>>> *(i) a disability (within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992); or*
- >>>>
- >>>> *(ii) a mental impairment (within the meaning of the Criminal Code).*
- >>
- >> *(2) Subsection (1) does not limit the power of the Legislative Assembly to make laws with respect to:*
- >>
- >>> *(a) the withdrawal or withholding of medical or surgical measures for prolonging the life of a patient, but not so as to permit the intentional killing of a person who is under 18 years of age; and*
- >>>
- >>> *(b) medical treatment in the provision of palliative care to a dying patient, but not so as to permit the intentional killing of a person who is under 18 years of age; and*
- >>>
- >>> *(c) the appointment of an agent by a patient who is authorised to make decisions about the withdrawal or withholding of treatment; and*
- >>>
- >>> *(d) the repealing of legal sanctions against attempted suicide.*
<p class="italic">(1) Schedule 1, item 1, page 3 (lines 4 and 5), omit the item, substitute:</p><p class="italic">1 Subsections 23(1A) and (1B)</p><p class="italic">Repeal the subsections, substitute:</p><p class="italic">(1A) The Assembly has no power to make laws permitting or having the effect of permitting (whether subject to conditions or not) the form of intentional killing of another called euthanasia (which includes mercy killing), or the assisting of a person to terminate the person's life, in circumstances where:</p><p class="italic">(a) the person whose life is to be terminated is under 18 years of age; or</p><p class="italic">(b) the euthanasia is performed or the assistance is provided solely on the ground that the person whose life is to be terminated has:</p><p class="italic">(i) a disability (within the meaning of the <i>Disability Discrimination Act 1992</i>); or</p><p class="italic">(ii) a mental impairment (within the meaning of the <i>Criminal Code</i>).</p><p class="italic">(1B) Subsection (1A) does not limit the power of the Assembly to make laws with respect to:</p><p class="italic">(a) the withdrawal or withholding of medical or surgical measures for prolonging the life of a patient, but not so as to permit the intentional killing of a person who is under 18 years of age; and</p><p class="italic">(b) medical treatment in the provision of palliative care to a dying patient, but not so as to permit the intentional killing of a person who is under 18 years of age; and</p><p class="italic">(c) the appointment of an agent by a patient who is authorised to make decisions about the withdrawal or withholding of treatment; and</p><p class="italic">(d) the repealing of legal sanctions against attempted suicide.</p><p class="italic">(2) Schedule 1, item 2, page 3 (lines 7 and 8), omit the item, substitute:</p><p class="italic">2 Section 50A</p><p class="italic">Repeal the section, substitute:</p><p class="italic">50A Law s concerning euthanasia</p><p class="italic">(1) Subject to this section the power of the Legislative Assembly conferred by section 6 in relation to the making of laws does not extend to the making of laws which permit or have the effect of permitting (whether subject to conditions or not) the form of intentional killing of another called euthanasia (which includes mercy killing), or the assisting of a person to terminate the person's life, in circumstances where:</p><p class="italic">(a) the person whose life is to be terminated is under 18 years of age; or</p><p class="italic">(b) the euthanasia is performed or the assistance is provided solely on the ground that the person whose life is to be terminated has:</p><p class="italic">(i) a disability (within the meaning of the <i>Disability Discrimination Act 1992</i>); or</p><p class="italic">(ii) a mental impairment (within the meaning of the <i>Criminal Code</i>).</p><p class="italic">(2) Subsection (1) does not limit the power of the Legislative Assembly to make laws with respect to:</p><p class="italic">(a) the withdrawal or withholding of medical or surgical measures for prolonging the life of a patient, but not so as to permit the intentional killing of a person who is under 18 years of age; and</p><p class="italic">(b) medical treatment in the provision of palliative care to a dying patient, but not so as to permit the intentional killing of a person who is under 18 years of age; and</p><p class="italic">(c) the appointment of an agent by a patient who is authorised to make decisions about the withdrawal or withholding of treatment; and</p><p class="italic">(d) the repealing of legal sanctions against attempted suicide.</p><p>The purpose of the Restoring Territory Rights Bill 2022 is to amend the Australian Capital Territory (Self-Government) Act 1988 and the Northern Territory (Self-Government) Act 1978 to remove the provisions currently preventing the territories from passing legislation which would allow for voluntary assisted dying. The bill would not legalise that in either of the territories but rather would allow the legislative assemblies of the ACT and the NT to pass laws allowing for VAD. Despite what the Labor Northern Territory and federal House of Representatives members have portrayed of me publicly, I do support the bill and am doing my job—which they should note how to better do themselves—in making a bad bill better for the Territory. I'll say this again: I absolutely support the rights of Territorians. The proposed amendments, drafted by the parliamentary clerk, have been developed to ensure that the exact restraints that are currently operative in state law are applied in the Territory, because we have some of the most vulnerable communities and people in Australia.</p><p>For those who don't get to see what's going on up in the Northern Territory, in the last week police have disposed of 229 litres of alcohol, and 168 people have been taken into protective custody. The Northern Territory Labor government are too busy protecting their own parliamentary convicted paedophiles to protect life. Alcohol related crime and violence are out of control. The federal Labor members for Lingiari and Solomon should hang their heads in shame. Both have publicly called for the CLP to disendorse me because I'm doing my job in the Senate by making a bad bill better. They are misleading Territorians about my actions on this bill. Not supporting a bill in its current form and proposing amendments that already exist right across Australia is doing my job to scrutinise a bill for the betterment of Territorians. There seems to be so much unease about me speaking the truth on what's going on in the Northern Territory. In relation to this bill, no states across Australia allow access to assisted dying for those under the age of 18. This proposed amendment ensures that this applies in the Northern Territory.</p><p>The New South Wales Voluntary Assisted Dying Act 2022, part 2, clause 16, states:</p><p class="italic">(2) A person is not eligible for access to voluntary assisted dying merely because the person has—</p><p class="italic">(a) a disability, or</p><p class="italic">(b) dementia, or</p><p class="italic">(c) a mental health impairment within the meaning of the Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020.</p><p>Those with mental illness and those with disability can still access the schemes if they meet other criteria under state law. So, if it is so good for these other states, why is it not good enough for the territories? There are those that think this might be a radical reform. I can tell you now it's not a radical reform to ensure that children don't have access to voluntary assisted dying. This does occur in some Scandinavian countries, and in Canada a person with a mental health condition and disability can access their assisted suicide scheme even without a terminal condition. Why, you have to ask, does Senator Pocock oppose an amendment that provides additional safeguards for children, those with a disability and mental health conditions? Why is he seeking to erode protections for vulnerable persons in the territories?</p><p>The Victorian Voluntary Assisted Dying Act 2017 provisions state:</p><p class="italic">(3) A person is not eligible for access to voluntary assisted dying only because the person has a disability, within the meaning of section 3(1) of the Disability Act 2006.</p><p>In Victoria, voluntary assisted dying is only for people who are suffering from an incurable, advanced and progressive disease, illness or medical condition who are experiencing intolerable suffering. The condition must be assessed by two medical practitioners to be expected to cause death within six months. There is an exception for a person suffering from a neurodegenerative condition, where instead the condition must be expected to cause death within 12 months. Voluntary assisted dying is only available to Victorians who are over the age of 18, who have lived in Victoria for at least 12 months and who have decision-making capacity. To be eligible for voluntary assisted dying they must be experiencing suffering that cannot be relieved in a manner the person considers tolerable. In Victoria, mental illness or disability alone—which is what I have provided for in this amendment—are not grounds for access to voluntary assisted dying, but people who meet all other criteria and who have a disability or mental illness can still access the service.</p><p>New South Wales was the last state to pass similar legislation. Some are not confident there are enough safeguards for people with mental health issues, so this is a lesson learnt—that the Australian government does have a responsibility to ensure vulnerable people are protected. The amendment is simply saying that you cannot solely—and I emphasise 'solely' because there are a number of measures that one must meet to be eligible—use the basis of having a disability, like autism, to access the provision of euthanasia or assisted dying.</p><p>Again, I don't take my decisions lightly. I come from a part of this country where we have some of our most vulnerable Australians. There is often not enough education and consultation in this area, and I would ask that the Territory government—or whatever territory government decides to legislate for this—do the right thing and do the consultation to alleviate fears on the ground of vulnerable Aboriginal people that if they enter into a hospital and they are unwell they might be given a needle and killed. I can tell you now that there are vulnerable people who think this where I come from. There is a lot to consider with this bill, but my amendments are fairly straightforward, and I hope that I can get the support of my colleagues in this chamber—right through this chamber—for these amendments ensuring that our vulnerable people in the Northern Territory are protected.</p> <p class="speaker">Katy Gallagher</p><p>I welcome the opportunity to speak on the amendment from Senator Nampijinpa Price, and I accept that you have not taken this decision lightly. I think it's been a very respectful debate in this place, and I'm sure that that will continue as we reach the final stages of this bill.</p><p>Before I go to the amendment, I acknowledge in the chamber that we have in the gallery the Chief Minister of the ACT, Andrew Barr; Minister Tara Cheyne; and Marshall Perron, a former minister of the Northern Territory. Thank you for being here. You created history and in a sense set off the concertina of legislation that we are currently here trying to repeal this evening. I also acknowledge Andrew Denton and Dr Swan from Go Gentle who are here as well as some of the supporters of the reform and the repeal of this legislation and a friend of mine, Gina Pinkus, who has lobbied very strongly across the community for this legislation to be repealed.</p><p>I'll go to the amendment. I think the senator who moved them identified the issue that we are trying to deal with here, which is that this parliament should not be the place where we are looking for safeguards or putting in place restrictions on the job that we are wanting the territory legislatures to have the power to do. So I am speaking against the amendment, because the bill that is before us is a repeal of a law which prevents those legislatures from determining this matter for themselves. That is the soul, single and only purpose of the legislation before us—to get rid of the constraint on those parliaments from being able to debate that themselves.</p><p>I know and I accept that people feel very strongly about this and think the Commonwealth should have some control. I disagree with that, but also the way that this amendment is drafted is extremely broad. That we are trying to place restrictions, for example, on people with a disability, then that is a very broad definition. I think if this amendment was to pass it would render anything that the territory legislatures did ineffective. In a sense it is an anti-repeal amendment. I have no doubt it comes from a good place, but I am trying to explain to you that the bill that's before us tonight is about getting rid of constraints on the territory legislatures and leaving it to them to determine. When you look at the state jurisdictions that have put in voluntary assisted dying legislation, they have safeguards in place. They go through a process of consultation, they have ethics processes, they have oversight and they have safeguards, and it is appropriate that those legislatures do that job.</p><p>Our job here tonight is to get rid of the constraint that exists in only two jurisdictions, the ACT and the Northern Territory, whose citizens are currently now not afforded the same rights as citizens of every other jurisdiction, and their parliaments are constrained. They are democratically elected parliaments, they are mature parliaments, they are held accountable by their communities and they face elections. It is more than reasonable that these parliaments be allowed to do this for themselves. So, on the grounds that the amendment effectively tries to anti-repeal a repeal bill, I won't be supporting it. But, even on the way the amendment is drafted, if it got up it would mean that those parliaments would in effect not be able to put in place a voluntary assisted dying regime, which is up to them whether they do that. Our job is to get out of the way and let them have the same legislative responsibilities and powers as the parliaments of New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania, Queensland, Western Australia and South Australia.</p> <p class='motion-notice motion-notice-truncated'>Long debate text truncated.</p>-
-
|