Bradford Sue: Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Bradford Sue: Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:637;Page:8006] 
SUE BRADFORD (Green) 
: 
 I would like to take just a quick call to explain why the Green Party will not be supporting Judy Turner’s amendment to clause 2. We believe that trying to put in a clause asking for a referendum as part of a bill undermines the parliamentary process and the sovereignty of Parliament. Members have a job to do. Whatever political background we come from and whatever party we are from we were elected to represent our party and to represent the voters who voted for us at the last election. At times that can be difficult. On really intense issues such as this it can get very difficult. But this is the place where we work these things out and we have to have the courage of our convictions on these difficult issues; it does not matter where we are coming from on them. It is the job of members of Parliament to show leadership not to run away from difficult issues and not to run away from all those emails from both sides of the debate that are pouring into our offices as we speak. 
The whole reason for Parliament is that we have the processes in place that enable us to make informed decisions. We have the research facilities of our staff and of Parliament itself that allow us to look at the whole range of issues; it does not matter what legislation it is. We also have the select committee process through which we had thousands of submissions on this bill—and all that public input. We have the officials who support us—in this case from a number of different Government departments. We have the whole consideration process inside the select committee. That is a part of our democracy that is based on information consideration and public input not on blind prejudice. 
Almost all select committees make amendments as part of this process as the Justice and Electoral Committee did in this case based on official advice on submissions and on our own debate between us as members of Parliament. We are simply doing our job and amendments like Judy Turner’s undermine that process. Changing the law is not just about public will; it is also about informed decision-making. 
The other thing I would like to say very strongly about Judy Turner’s amendment is that children should be at the centre of this debate. They are the ones who are most affected by the retention of section 59 of the Crimes Act—the defence of reasonable force for the purposes of correction. It is children who still do not receive the same protection from violence as adults do. Babies children and young people do not have a direct voice in this Parliament. They have a voice only through adult MPs. We all have our own approach as to how we bring that voice in here but sadly children’s voices are not often heard in this place of power. 
It is not easy for children’s needs and priorities to be heard in this Parliament and that is what a lot of us are trying to do here tonight. Although it is difficult to have children’s opinions expressed in Parliament it is even harder for their views to be expressed through referenda because no one under 18 can sign a referendum if it is part of the official referendum process. So although referenda are very easy to engage with—people can simply sign them—children have no access to them. It is just another way in which children and young people are completely disenfranchised. 
Judy Turner’s amendment is a recipe for a decision made on ignorance and prejudice especially given the nature of some of the input to this debate over the last 2 years. Far from being a democratic amendment in fact it totally undermines the process of parliamentary democracy in this country. The Green Party will certainly be voting against it and I call on other parties in this Chamber to do likewise.