Andrew Bragg (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to make some remarks on this important bill, the Restoring Territory Rights Bill 2022. I note there was a prior version of this bill flagged for pretty limited discussion, I must say, in the last parliament by former Senator McMahon. I am very pleased that arrangements have been made to allow senators to make some statements on these matters. I have listened carefully to the various contributions that have been made, and my own view is that it is very hard to separate the issue that has been the driver of this 25-year-old bill from the issue of territory rights. I talk, of course, of voluntary assisted dying.

My general philosophy for political contribution has been one of 'live and let live', which, I think, is an important cornerstone of Australian liberalism and is a philosophy which is shared by other members and senators in this place in various forms. That is the key principle that drives me here in making comments about the issue of voluntary assisted dying.

In relation to the issue of self-government, I think that we are clearly half-pregnant on this issue here in this federal parliament. Either we have decided to grant self-government to the territories—the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory—or we have not. The last time I looked, we had decided to do that, and therefore, if we have decided to grant self-government, then we ought to allow those assemblies to get on with the job of making the laws for their citizens. We have this dreadful situation where my constituents, who live in southern New South Wales, can access voluntary assisted dying, but of course the people of the Capital Territory cannot access the same services should they wish. And there's no way they can get those services, because the jurisdiction in which they live has been granted self-government but the federal parliament has taken away that assembly's right to make laws in some areas, which makes it patently unfair. It's very unfair. So I think it is an issue of democratic civil rights being at stake here, and I am hopeful that this parliament will now overturn what has been a very unjust law which has denied basic access to civil rights in relation to voluntary assisted dying.

For disclosure purposes, I will say that I have spent parts of my life in Canberra, in the Capital Territory, and I don't regard the people who live here as being second-class citizens in Australia. I think that every Australian deserves to have access to the same rights and opportunities. Certainly this law—the 'Andrews bill' when it was enacted—has denied access to equal rights. I do note that it was enacted at a time when the Northern Territory had decided to go it alone and to put in place the first voluntary assisted dying laws in the Commonwealth. But, in 2022—I don't seek to repeat all the arguments that have been made here, but I think it is important for the record to note—we now stand here with the position that the only jurisdictions on the mainland that cannot get access to these services are the territories, because of a 25-year-old law. So, as I say, I think that we should get on, and I hope that we can have a vote on this sooner rather than later. But it is impossible to separate the issue of territory rights from this substantive matter which led to the Andrews bill being enacted wrongly by this parliament.

I note that, of course, there was a stronger case for the Andrews bill perhaps 25 years ago than there is today, where I see no case at all for the Andrews bill. But we are after all a secular nation, and in general terms I think that the 'live and let live' credo is one that can apply across the board. If this bill is successful, it is now up to the legislatures of the territories to enact their own laws, make their own judgements and be accountable to their own citizens. I imagine that, in doing so, they will seek to enact protections so that voluntary assisted dying remains just that—voluntary assisted dying. It is a judgement for individuals to make in accordance with medical professionals and certainly not a right that the federal parliament should try and steal from the territories.

So at the end of the day, there are strong parallels to recent discussions this parliament has had about expanding civil rights like marriage equality. We should always seek to progress the ability of all citizens to access the same rights and services in our country. None of this of course is compulsory. If you don't want to use these services you don't have too, so I entirely reject the argument that enacting or removing the Andrews bill will open the floodgates. Certainly, the protections that have been put in place in the states have shown that the protections can and do work. I thank very much the Senate today for facilitating this debate. I hope it is not too long until we can go to a vote on this important matter.

Debate interrupted.