Evidence (Identification) Amendment Bill
06/03/2012
The Hon. K.L. VINCENT (17:28): I do not wish to occupy too much of the council’s time, as usual, but I have a few remarks that I would like to add to the record on this important bill. This bill has been brought on quite suddenly due to the recent failure of a government bill of the same name to pass in the Legislative Council following the failure of another identical bill in 2011. As I understand it, it is hoped that the discussion of this bill, which addresses the same issue in a substantially different way, offers some prospect of a compromise. It is clear at least, from the contributions of members to the debate of the defeated bill, that there is a great deal of will to see the issue resolved, though we disagree to an extent on how to resolve it.
Members will already be aware of my feelings on this issue, which were outlined in my second reading speech on the government bill. I am highly supportive of the effort to see a greater diversity of identification evidence recognised by the state’s justice system. However, I feel that an important part of this effort must ensure that the processes and procedures by which evidence is collected, presented and utilised is clear, precise and accessible to all. Given the failure of the justice system to make any measurable progress in this regard, I strongly believe that there is a need here for parliament to intervene.
This was a key consideration in my decision to reject the government bill and it is now one of the major considerations against which I seek to measure the bill before us now. While I have not had as long as I might like to consider this bill and the Hon. Stephen Wade’s amendments thereto, I see a great deal of promise.
The amendments proposed to date—and I am sure there shall be others—gives scope for the parliament to be involved in setting important expectations about how evidence is collected through regulations. They also call the courts’ attention to a witness’s disability when considering whether or not to admit evidence collected by a non-compliant process.
I am yet to reach a final, conclusive decision regarding this bill but I, like other members, have a number of questions that I have referred to the Hon. Mr Wade. I understand that we will not be proceeding beyond the first clause today in order to allow some discussion on these matters, so I look forward to discussing this bill further and hopefully seeing some progress in addressing this broad issue.
