Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

After listening to Senator Hume's speech today I think there's very little more one should really feel they need to say in this debate. But I do want to put my own remarks on the record, in particular because Western Australia has now had the benefit of voluntary assisted dying laws for some time. It's true to say that the uptake has been somewhat larger than initially expected. I put that down to the number of families and people who are in exactly the kinds of shoes of Senator Hume and her father. There have been, as I understand it, some 170 deaths using Western Australia's voluntary assisted dying laws.

I have always been pro-voluntary assisted dying. I haven't had the need for it for people close to me in my own family. However, I have spoken to a great many citizens in my own home state of Western Australia who saw the need for it in the context of their own lives and family experiences. Indeed, my own mother lobbied me. She is 83 and very healthy. She wants the confidence that, should it come to it, should she be in the kind of circumstances that Senator Hume outlined for her father, she would like to be able to access voluntary assisted dying in Western Australia, which brings me to this point. In the case of the ACT you could not have a more pro-voluntary assisted dying jurisdiction in the country. You could not have a more pro jurisdiction in the whole of the nation. Yet, they are the last—along with the Northern Territory—to be able to discuss these issues, debate them and implement them on their own terms. It is patently ridiculous that this is the case.

I say to senators here who oppose this legislation: either we can give the right back to the territories to decide these issues for themselves or this place has an obligation to implement voluntary assisted dying for the ACT. There's no reason that the rights of individuals should be so far behind that of other jurisdictions who have access to voluntary assisted dying already.

The jurisdiction of the ACT could not have, frankly, a more demanding demographic asking for the protection of these laws should they ever need them here in the ACT. We have a jurisdiction that has some of the most progressive and open laws around the possession of marijuana, for example. We haven't taken away the ACT's rights on those questions.

If this place can't allow itself to give the right back to the ACT to pass its own laws, well, what then? Are we simply going to sit here forever, because of the moral conscience of those who are deeply opposed to euthanasia in this place, and, therefore, that conscience leads them to decide that they're going to vote against giving that right to the ACT and the Northern Territory? That could be the outcome, but I hope the numbers are better than that.

It is patently ridiculous that, should we fail, it would be an inevitable consequence that this place would have to think about the citizens it governs because it has not let the ACT and the Northern Territory govern on these questions for themselves. We are simply debating the issue of giving them the right to govern for themselves on these questions. Should we deprive them of that right? It does not take the substantive issue away. As a federal parliament that has the power to intervene in these matters and take that right away, it should frankly mean we would have to debate the introduction and application of laws in the territories to implement voluntary assisted dying.

But who is better to debate those laws? As Senator McCarthy so eloquently outlined, she wants her Territory to have that right back for itself. She would perhaps advocate against the eventual passing of such laws in the Territory. But, again, we need the parliament to be close to the people on these questions. The Northern Territory has diverse First Nations communities to work with, just as my own home state of Western Australia does.

In the case of the ACT, you could not have a more pro-euthanasia, pro-voluntary-assisted-dying jurisdiction. It would be the most pro jurisdiction in the country, just as it was the most pro-marriage-equality jurisdiction in the country. I very much hope that this legislation passes and that the ACT government is already thinking about what these laws would look like with the right protections but, I would hope, not-too-onerous protections. There is very much a balance to get right here, as Senator Hume's very moving speech outlined.

I know these are deeply personal issues. If you are anti-voluntary assisted dying, that is a matter for you and the people you influence in your family. But there is a dire need to support families who are grappling with these issues. Locally in Western Australia there is a very active service doing a great job navigating the voluntary assisted dying laws—not only use of those laws but also strong palliative care support, because many people will pass before they need the use of such legislation.

I thank the Senate for its indulgence in hearing my remarks on this question today. I commend the bill to the Senate.