Deborah O'Neill (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

This is the sound of democracy—the stridency, the pauses, the hope, the emotion, the respect for difference. Sometimes it concerns me that the debate about democracy calls for beautiful harmony. I like thirds. I love singing. I love the harmony that results when voices come out. But the sound of democracy is not always harmonious, and when it's at its best it's not autocratic; it's not one view over the others, with judgement everywhere. It's a multiplicity of voices. I actually said in one of our committee meetings this morning that the first time I heard the music of Shostakovich I thought: 'This is not the sort of music I'm able to cope with. I'm not able to listen to it, not able to stand it, because there's too much tension in the music.' It didn't sound familiar enough to me. I wanted sweet harmonies from the romantic period. But I learned to love it, as I've learned to love democracy. So, I'm very proud to be sitting in this chamber alongside colleagues who have given serious thought to this issue that's under debate as a matter of conscience and free vote for all of us.

I want to respond to the contribution of Senator Tyrrell, who asked I think a really good question—one of these fundamental democratic questions—'Why am I here as a senator for Tasmania making a decision about people who live in the ACT and the Northern Territory?' Well, you're here because you're a federal senator. We're a federation. And in what we do and what we're referring to here we are actually speaking into the space that's been constructed by our Constitution. It is a fact that the purpose of the Restoring Territory Rights Bill 2022 is to amend the Australian Capital Territory (Self-Government) Act 1988 and the Northern Territory (Self-Government) Act 1978 to remove provisions that are currently preventing the territories from passing legislation which would allow for voluntary assisted dying. That's what we are doing here, and we are doing it because section 122 of the Constitution provides that the Commonwealth has plenary powers to legislate for the territories.

So, while this bill is colloquially described as restoring territory rights, ultimately it's not giving rights to the territories that are held by states. It's giving a right on one issue. It doesn't resolve the federal-territory relationship completely. This is despite much debate that articulates that this is just about territory rights. This is about one particular right, and it deserves our attention. It is the right to voluntary assisted dying, which in other contexts is called euthanasia. I've made clear in my second speech my particular view on this matter. I know that there was a vote last week when I wasn't here in parliament. I heard the contribution from Senator Roberts about the way in which that was conducted and his curry about how this is going to turn out.

Maybe mine will be a strident voice and not a harmonious one tonight, but I think it is an important night to put things on the record. I won't resile from the fact that I represent here in this place the great Australian Labor Party, and amongst the Liberal Party and, dare I say, the Greens party and independents there are people of faith. They do wonderful things in our community. Their faith gives them action to do good works. They care. Many of our hospitals were first established by orders of faith. So I want to put on the record that part of this debate needs to be profoundly respected, even if you are not a person of faith. There is a faith position not shared harmoniously within each faith—stridently held views—but there are powerful, strong views, and there is tradition, there is dogma, there is thinking and there's a whole literature base about euthanasia and life. That voice, at odds with those who are fighting as wonderful citizens in this country for voluntary assisted dying, is a voice that we need to accept and live with. It is here in the chamber and it is in our community. It should be reflected everywhere. And that will be dealt with with another piece of legislation protecting people against religious discrimination.

We are this wonderful multicultural, multifaith community, so I do not resile from the fact that it is a faith education in wonderful Catholic schools that gives me some confidence in putting on the record my particular view about voluntary assisted dying, which is that there are inherent risks that give me great concern. I want to make it clear that my view is that this bill is about euthanasia, and that seems to be the flavour of the debate that we are having around the chamber this evening.

I also want to acknowledge the contributions of senators not just in the second reading debate over the many months that we been having this consideration but the contributions this evening of my colleague Senator Scarr about 'in good faith' conversations. I will have a couple of questions to both Senator Gallagher and Senator Nampijinpa Price about my concerns with the language that is in the amendment, the concerns that have been raised about the definitional matter. And, if I may ask Senator Pocock immediately, in referring to what Senator Shoebridge said about the advice that has been received from a barrister that you referred to in your own speech, Senator Pocock, that perhaps it might be tabled, because as this bill wraps up this evening—and it will go to a vote—these are resources that become useful to those from the territory, whether it is the ACT or the Northern Territory, in the deliberations that will occur.

I want to acknowledge my colleagues here in this place from the Northern Territory and the ACT in the Labor Party and those who are from the Northern Territory and ACT in the opposition and on the crossbenches. Are there any? Yes, yes—the agitator, the man who has done what he promised and brought this to the attention of a parliament. That is a good thing, because that is democracy in action.

Senator Pocock, are you willing to table the advice from the barrister that you have received that gives you a particular view about the risks inherent in the amendment that is being moved by Senator Nampijinpa Price?