Territory Stories

Debates Day 3 - Thursday 21 October 1993

Details:

Title

Debates Day 3 - Thursday 21 October 1993

Other title

Parliamentary Record 21

Collection

Debates for 6th Assembly 1990 - 1994; ParliamentNT; Parliamentary Record; 6th Assembly 1990 - 1994

Date

1993-10-21

Notes

Made available by the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory

Language

English

Subject

Debates

Publisher name

Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory

Place of publication

Darwin

File type

application/pdf

Use

Attribution International 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)

Copyright owner

Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory

License

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Parent handle

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/279555

Citation address

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/418727

Page content

DEBATES - Thursday 21 October 1923. Mr MANZIE: I sent it as early as I possibly could. Mr Ede: When? Mr MANZIE: On Monday. I told him what the circumstances were and ... Mr Bell: No, you did not, not until Monday. Mr MANZIE: I am not going to send anything on a Saturday. For those reasons, it is obvious that urgency is required. I believe that the suggestion from the opposition spokesman that he believes that the opposition should oppose urgency on this matter is really very stupid. I am glad that the Leader of the Opposition has overridden the member because he was suggesting that Territorians should be left without the ability to exercise a power of citizen's arrest when that ability is available to all other Australians. I am pleased that at least the Leader of the Opposition has seen sense sufficiently to override his legal spokesman. Motion agreed to. EXPLANATION OF SPEECH Mr BELL (MacDonnell): Mr Speaker, I would like to make an explanation of a speech under standing order 5 because the government has taken quite the wrong point in regard to my concern about urgency. I do not resile in any way from my criticism of the government, and in particular the Attorney-General's refusal to advise us earlier of the general need for us to address the issue. If the Attorney-General wants to paint my views as being opposed to urgency and therefore taking no interest in the question of a citizen's power of arrest or as suggesting that the issue should not be addressed, he is quite wrong. The fact is that the opposition does support this issue being addressed. My comments earlier were tendered to address the question of how the government seeks urgency. If it wants urgency, it should tell us when it forms the idea that it will need to put the bill through the Assembly within the course of 4 days. CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT BILL (Serial 283) Continued from 19 October 1993 Mr EDE (Opposition Leader): Mr Speaker, as I said earlier, I believe there are some problems with this bill. We will be debating those during the committee stage, but I want to highlight them briefly first to afford the Attorney-General the opportunity to note the areas of my concern and inform himself on them to enable him to address them at that time. There appears to be no problem with an arrest where somebody finds an offender committing an offence and takes action to ensure their appearance before a court of competent jurisdiction, to preserve public order, to prevent continuation of the offence, or for the safety or welfare of the public. I have absolutely no problem with that whatsoever. That is a need that occurs at certain times, and I believe that that is right and proper. My difficulty arises in regard to the other aspect of this - the ability under this legislation for a private person to arrest another person, not when they see an offence or they know that an offence is being committed, but when they have a 'reasonable person's belief' that an offence has been committed. They have that belief, but they do not know that the offence has 10 209


Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are advised that this website may contain the names, voices and images of people who have died, as well as other culturally sensitive content. Please be aware that some collection items may use outdated phrases or words which reflect the attitude of the creator at the time, and are now considered offensive.

We use temporary cookies on this site to provide functionality.
By continuing to use this site without changing your settings, you consent to our use of cookies.