Month: June 2002

The judges do not see it like Freddie Mercury who said in the lyrics of the great Queen song Bohemian Rhapsody, “”I sometimes wish I’d never been born at all.” For the judges, a comparison between of the value of non-existence with the value of existence in a disabled state is an impossible exercise.

The logic and law of the dismissal of the “‘wrongful life” cases in NSW this week were compelling – so compelling, in fact, that they show how inadequate the adversary system of law is in dealing with these cases of human suffering.

Three cases – the first of their kind in Australia — were decided by Justice Timothy Studdert. One baby was born with a genetic after a vasectomy failed. Another was born with a genetic defect after IVF treatment and the IVF program failed to screen and advise. The third was born with severe disability after the mother had rubella (measles) in pregnancy. The mother told her doctor about a rash and doctors failed to diagnose it correctly. In each case the babies sued for wrongful birth. The parents are also suing and their cases are pending.
Continue reading “2002_06_june_wrongful birth”

Australia has the technology and the wealth to provide all the major sport on television. There should be no need for 5am telecasts of the AFL match of the day as slotted for this morning. There should be no need for Wednesday night’s cramming of rugby league, soccer and tennis with the truncation of opening and closing moments.

Federal Opposition sports spokeswoman Senator Kate Lundy has blamed Communications Minister Senator Richard Alston. Senator Alston has passed the buck top the sports organisations and the television channels.

Fundamentally, though, the buck should stop at Senator Alston and the government. They have laid the policy and legislative groundwork that creates the current fiasco.

Labor’s communications spokesman, Lindsay Tanner, accused Channel Nine of hogging the ball. But the blame must lie with the Government which drafted the rules that allowed Channel Nine to take possession of the ball in the first place.
Continue reading “2002_06_june_tv fiasco”

Every Budget, ACT and Federal, journalists attend a lock-up in which they get the Budget papers several hours in advance. Half way through, the Treasurer gives a media conference.

For the past half dozen year, I have asked an almost ritual question: when is something going to be done about the outrageous stamp duty rates to take account of ever rising house prices?

Not this year. Something was done about them. They actually went up! And I don’t use exclamation marks lightly.

There was a minor change in 1987, but for more than 20 years stamp duty rates have not been changed to take account of rising house prices. It would be like applying the 1980 income tax rates to present income – top marginal rate of 66 per cent on incomes above $50,000.
Continue reading “2002_06_june_stamp duty oped”

After the election in November last year, few gave the Senate much thought. The change in the numbers following the half-Senate election looked of no consequence. NSW Democrat Vicki Bourne lost her seat to the Greens’ Kerry Nettle, otherwise the numbers stayed the same. The Coalition retained the 20 seats it had up for re-election; Labor retained its 13 seats; the Greens Bob Brown was re-elected. Independent Brian Harradine and One Nation Len Harris were not up for re-election this time.

One Green for a Democrat, so what. But events in the past week or so, show that there is a critical difference – especially with the numbers the way they are.

The Greens Bob Brown asserted that the environment was more important than keeping Telstra in private ownership. If the price was right, he would allow Telstra to be privatised – provided the money went to environmental projects that otherwise would not get done.

Senators have a fixed term beginning on July 1 after the election. So the new senators elected on November 10 take their seats on July 1. June 27 is the last sitting of this Senate and the new Senate assembles in August.
Continue reading “2002_06_june_senate”

The compensation agreements for sexual abuse signed by members of the Catholic Church have given rise to the questions: Why weren’t these matters reported to the police? and Surely those who did not report them are themselves guilty of a crime?

They are serious legal questions. Australian law – having its roots in the common law of England – is robustly individualistic. It is fairly slow to apply civic duties. The law imposes no obligation to help people in distress, unlike European countries. One can walk past a drowning infant or watch a blind person walk towards a cliff edge and the law says there is no requirement to do anything, even if only the slightest effort would avoid catastrophe. It is immoral, of course, but we are not talking about morality here.

There are some requirements with respect to crime, but not very onerous ones.
Continue reading “2002_06_june_pell crime”

Excising off-shore islands in the north of Australia from the “”migration zone” does not make sense. When you pose the question why enough times, the logical move by the Government should be to excise the whole of Australia from the migration zone.

Why does the Government want to excise these islands?

Because once they are excised people who land on those islands have different migration rights from people who land on the mainland. The Migration Act gives rights to people who are in the “”migration zone” and no rights to those who are not in it
Continue reading “2002_06_june_migration zone”

Retrospective legislation is almost always undesirable. It was undesirable when the previous ACT Government sought to remove rights under victims’ compensation laws in 1999. The law changed the rights of people who had already put claims in or who had sustained injuries before the legislation was passed. It was unfair and the Government should not have put such legislation to the Assembly. Instead it should have curtailed only claims arising out of injuries sustained from the date of the legislation.

Some of the victims appealed to the courts arguing that the law was invalid. The Supreme Court accepted their argument and the Full Federal Court upheld an appeal last week. The main grounds of the appeal were that the law offended the Constitution’s requirement that property not be acquired by government except with just compensation and that the law also offended the ACT provision that mirrored the constitutional provision.
Continue reading “2002_06_june_leader30jun injuries”

The ACT Chief Minister, Jon Stanhope, is to seek to increase the size of the ACT Legislative Assembly. There is a very good case to be made for increasing the size of the Assembly. The only real question is by how many and how should those members represent the ACT.

Mr Stanhope has favoured the minority report of the Assembly’s Standing Committee on Legal Affairs – that of Labor Member John Hargreaves – which says the Assembly should be increased from its present 17 Members to 23. The majority – Liberal Bill Stefaniak and Green Kerrie Tucker — has recommended an increase to 21.

Mr Hargreaves recommended four electorates of six, six, six and five members. The majority recommended three electorates of seven members.
Continue reading “2002_06_june_leader28jun assembly size”