Northern Territory Second Reading Speeches Northern Territory Second Reading Speeches[Index] [Search] [Bill] [Help]
| Mr MILLS (Opposition Leader): Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time. In so doing, I seek leave to table the accompanying explanatory memorandum. Leave granted. Mr MILLS: Madam Speaker, this bill is a straightforward bill designed to have a clear message and an unambiguous consequence, therefore it is not necessary to provide a long-winded speech. The policy intention is to make it clear to would be violent criminals that we here on this side of the Chamber value the contribution made by our public service and recognise that all too often they face unreasonable people who think it is appropriate to lash out at them while those hardworking servants of the public are merely doing their duty. This is not acceptable and, as a leader within the community, I will not accept this message having any credibility. That is why I have brought forward a bill that sets out clear minimum mandatory sentences for assaults on our hardworking frontline public servants. I have said previously on this matter and in this place that these people serve us and it is our duty to serve them and to give them the protection that they need. The bill that I have presented amends sections 188 and 189 of the Criminal Code. Change to section 188 is directed first at section 188(2). My bill inserts a new section (2)(a). This section sets out that, if a public servant is assaulted while undertaking their duties, then the court must, if it convicts the person who undertakes this offence, imprison them for a minimum of one month if it is an assault. Following a conviction where the public servant suffers harm, but not serious harm, then the minimum mandatory imprisonment period will be three months. If the person suffers serious harm, then the imprisonment period will be a mandated minimum of six months. The amendment to section 188(3) contained within this bill inserts a new section which defines the public servant for the purpose of those who are and in the execution of their duties. This section is designed to capture public sector employees, ambulance drivers, bus drivers, health professionals, such as nurses, doctors and the like. It is also designed to capture police, however the amendments to section 189 sets this out more clearly. This bill is designed to capture those public servants who for the period where they are undertaking their duties in this capacity. Reference is also made to subsection 2.(2)(fa) as being deemed public servants for the purposes of this bill. Amendments are also being made to section 189(a) of the Criminal Code in reference to police officers. A new subsection (3) is inserted that sets out mandatory minimum period of imprisonment for assaulting police officers; assaulting police officers causing harm; and, assaulting police officers causing serious harm; setting out one month, three month and six months respectively. Public servants need to know that they are valued and that there is no doubt that we on this side of the Chamber value their contribution and, in doing so, want to send a clear message to would be criminals who would assault and/or injure those outstanding people while they perform their public duty. We are on this side have a clear message for those people – do not even try, because if you do, you can be guaranteed that you will face mandatory gaol time. It is no ifs, it is no buts and it is no excuses, and that is how it should be, Madam Speaker. All Territorians should be assured that when they go to work they will be protected by the law, that public servants who deal on a daily basis with the public are in no way mistreated, manhandled or physically assaulted by someone who is incapable of keeping their emotions under control. As I said before, there is no excuse for venting frustration on a customer service provider who has gone to work that morning only to find that he or she is confronted by somebody who has seriously lost control of their emotions and who wants to make their problem someone else’s problem. The media is full of stories of people being attacked in the course of their job. Bus drivers, taxi drivers, front counter staff, they are all at the mercy of the public. The vast majority of them are decent, honourable, trustworthy citizens with similar values and ethics to people we are trying to protect with this bill. These are not the people we are targeting. We are targeting that small minority of people who cannot control their tempers when they are out in public, who have so little control of their emotions that ordinary people doing their jobs are at risk. It is disappointing that it had to be left to the opposition to introduce it, such a piece of legislation as this. This is the type of bill I would have thought the Henderson government would have seen fit to bring into this parliament. Labor’s failure to do so after eight years in office brings a fair indication of its priorities over the years. Madam SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition, it is 9 pm. Do you wish to continue for up to 10 minutes on this particular matter? Mr MILLS: Yes, and I will conclude, thank you. It will be less than that, thank you, Madam Speaker. Its focus has always been on protecting the interests of the perpetrators of crime rather than looking after the interests of ordinary law-abiding Territorians who go to work intent on providing for their families, and who find themselves on the receiving end of an unwarranted, unprovoked and senseless assault. This government’s approach to the victims of crime was recently summed up by Magistrate Alistair McGregor who, in relation to a particularly disturbing sexual assault recently, said that victims are less important than defendants in court. That is this government’s approach to victims in the Northern Territory. Well, here on the opposition benches, we think the focus should be on the victims, that is why through the legislation we have brought before the House, we want to protect public servants and to ensure that their safety is paramount. We believe putting minimum sentences on assaults on public servants will not only act as a deterrent to people who might otherwise behave in an atrocious fashion, but also serve as sufficient punishment for those people whose violence gets out of hand to the extent that they commit an assault on a public servant or a customer service officer. And, in closing, while this piece of legislation removes the discretion of judges to provide minimum sentences, perpetrators of these assaults, it in no way impinges upon their capacity to provide higher sentences. Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. |