Territory Stories

Parliamentary record : Part I debates (27 February 1990)



Parliamentary record : Part I debates (27 February 1990)


Debates for 5th Assembly 1987 - 1990; ParliamentNT; Parliamentary Record; 5th Assembly 1987 - 1990




Made available by the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory





Publisher name

Northern Territory Legislative Assembly

Place of publication


File type



Attribution International 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)

Copyright owner

Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory



Parent handle


Citation address


Page content

DEBATES - Tuesday 27 February 1990 past and, in fact, this committee may be giving the minister advice on those determinations and other matters. I think that that is perfectly reasonable. I do not have a problem with that. I ask the Attorney-General whether he has any provision to make public any variations from determinations made by the court under the existing system. After all, that was where the original difficulties arose. Determinations were made in favour of the victims and those determinations were varied. I do not mind if they are varied so long as at some stage, someone indicates why they were varied up or down on the basis of information available or the judgment of the people concerned. If this committee is to be involved in variations such as those the Attorney-General was involved in last year, I believe there is a need for the reasons for those variations and the decisions of the committee to be made public. I also ask the Attorney-General to expand a little on clause 7(e) which says that the functions of the committee include such other functions las are imposed on it by the minister or by or under this or any other actl. If the Attorney-General could give an indication of the sorts of things he would envisage the committee looking at and being involved in under that clause of the bill, I would be pleased to hear his comments. In general, the bill is a step in the right direction. members have said, it has yet to be seen how it will work. is worth a try and 1 commend the Attorney-General for it. As honourable On balance, it Mr MANZIE (Attorney-General): Mr Speaker, 1 will address the concerns of the member for Barkly first because his ignorance is absolutely frightening. I am amazed that he has not read the second-reading speech or looked at the bill. This has nothing whatsoever to do with the payment of compensation to victims of crime. This has no relevance to that matter whatsoever. For the member for Barkly to try to relate it to that is disturbing because it demonstrates either his lack of commitment to what has been put before the House or hi s tota 1 1 ack of understandi ng. I woul d certainly let the member for Barkly know that thi s has no relevance to assistance to victims of crime. It is very unfortunate that he can read that into the second-reading speech. Mr Bell: He only contrasted it, Daryl. Mr MANZIE: I will get around to the member for MacDonnell if he would like to sit down and keep quiet. Mr Bell: .1 am seated and have been for the last half hour. Mr MANZIE: I f he wants to keep interrupting, that is fi ne. He was the one who wanted to adjourn for tea but, obviously, he wants to keep matters going. Mr Speaker, this legislation creates an advisory committee which will provide advice to government in relation to victims of crime. Mr Speaker, I find it amazing. The member for Stuart is sitting there laughing. He does not give a damn about victims. That is fine. We know about that because the attitude that he has shown in this House makes it obvious. However, there are other people who have some concerns. Perhaps, out of consideration for other people, he might like to be quiet for a few minutes. Mr Ede: I am being misrepresented, Mr Speaker. 8826