HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2009-02-19 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

SUMMARY OFFENCES (PIERCING AND SCARIFICATION) BILL

Second Reading

Second reading.

Mr VENNING (Schubert) (10:55): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

The member for Kavel, who is absent, asked me to move the second reading of this bill, which has been moved in another place by the Hon. Mr Hood. We on this side are supporting it, with amendments. In a few minutes the member for Hammond will inform the house of the details of those amendments.

Generally, while legislation exists in section 21A of the Summary Offences Act that makes it illegal to tattoo a minor, this bill further extends that legislation, making it an offence to pierce any part of the body of a minor unless they are accompanied by an adult or guardian who consents. It also extends the prohibition in section 21A of the Summary Offences Act to include scarification.

This bill has a long history dating back to 2001, when an almost identical bill was introduced by the member for Fisher. In 2002 the member for Enfield introduced an extended version of it, and in 2005 a select committee into the issue was established. An extensive report was then tabled, which included legislative recommendations. The Hon. Dennis Hood in another place then reintroduced the bill (the third member to do so); however, Mr Hood's bill treats piercing of the earlobes in the same way as piercing of other parts of the body. The member for Enfield's version of the bill expressly excluded the piercing of earlobes.

There is nothing in the report of the select committee or in any other material that suggests that the practice of piercing earlobes is one that requires regulation. I understand that an amendment was carried in the other place to exclude earlobe piercing from being restricted by this bill, and I fully support that. Piercing of the earlobes is a very common practice in this country—I think most of our womenfolk have done it—and I think that, particularly for women, to make it an offence for a 17 year old to have her ears pierced is taking the bill too far. As such, I support the bill with the amendment carried in the other place.

I note that the Liberal Party does support this bill, but it also supports an amendment to exclude the piercing of earlobes from the bill. It supports the passage of the bill as it would be amended. So I commend the Hon. Dennis Hood for bringing back this bill, as well as the members for Fisher and Enfield for taking up the issue, which has been before the parliament for many years. Mutilation of the body has always been an emotive subject, particularly with overseas religious practices coming into it and especially in terms of female mutilation. That has always been a big issue, and it has been outlawed in this country. I believe this bill should be supported on both sides of the house. I support the bill.

The Hon. R.B. SUCH (Fisher) (10:57): I am pleased to see that this measure is still alive. It has had a chequered career in this place. As the member for Schubert pointed out, I introduced a bill back in 2001 called the Summary Offences (Piercing of Children) Amendment Bill which almost got through the upper house, but unfortunately it was stymied by the Democrats. We know that they do good things at many times, but they put up what I thought was an artificial protest about my bill, and it meant that it lapsed during prorogation, which was unfortunate. However, I had a chat to the member for Enfield, one of the shining lights of the parliament, and he then took up the issue. There was a committee inquiry into the matter, and we now have from another place a bill put forward by the Hon. Dennis Hood.

I agree with the view expressed by the member for Schubert: I do not believe that earlobes should be covered by this bill. I think that is probably taking the issue a bit too far. I would like to point out that, as far as I am aware, Queensland is the only state that currently has legislation on body piercing, but it relates only to genitals and nipples, which is a very restrictive provision. Victoria has been developing a bill (I am not sure whether it has been passed) which would prohibit scarification, tattooing and intimate body piercings to anyone under the age of 18.

The Select Committee on Tattooing and Body Piercing of our parliament, which made a lot of recommendations, reported that 19 per cent of young men are tattooed while under the influence of drugs and alcohol. If people are old enough and want to have a tattoo or an earring, I do not have a problem with it. I am concerned when people have these things when they are not fully aware of the consequences due to the influence of drugs or alcohol.

The issue is significant in the sense that, currently, we allow things to be done under body piercing in South Australia that doctors would find themselves in trouble over if they did the same thing to someone under the age of 16. If a medical practitioner carried out a similar procedure to body piercing on a person under the age of 16, I believe they would be in breach of the law, unless it was an emergency situation where they may have to resuscitate someone or something like that.

We have this bizarre situation where people, who may be totally untrained, can pierce the body of a minor (a child)—and that is meant to be totally illegal under the age of 18—yet qualified medical practitioners in a clinic down the road would be at risk of prosecution if they did something along the same lines.

The important issue with this is that tattooing and body piercing, as I said earlier, is really a matter of personal choice. The bill is trying to do what I am seeking to do—the only thing I am seeking to do—which is to protect children who may be vulnerable, who may not be aware of the consequences of people who, in effect, are taking advantage of them. I have seen babies with piercings and I do not think that is appropriate, but that is what is happening.

In terms of the medical aspects, a woman who lives near me had some tattooing done at an early age. She may have had body piercings as well, and one of those acts has resulted in her contracting hepatitis C which has raised her risk of liver damage to the point now where she has to have annual or biennial checks because it has put her at higher risk of contracting liver cancer.

When people talk about these issues, the health aspects are incredibly important. When body piercing and tattooing is done on anyone, irrespective of their age, it must be done in ways which safeguard that person's health. That is one of the key issues that concerns the medical profession: that people might be getting their body pierced, particularly in areas around the eyes, with the consequent risk that either there or in some other part of the body they might incur a long-term life-threatening illness as a result.

That is the main focus: to protect the health and wellbeing of children and adults and to make sure that people who have body piercing or tattooing are able to consent and are old enough to know what they are doing. I support this measure, but I also agree with the opposition and support the amendment to exempt ear lobes.

Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (11:04): I, too, rise to support this bill. I note that it was introduced by the Hon. Dennis Hood on 24 September 2008. He had introduced a similar bill in June 2007 which lapsed when parliament was prorogued but, obviously, this bill has passed the other place this time.

The bill will bring a lot of things into line with tattooing legislation. Currently, under section 21A of the Summary Offences Act, it is illegal to tattoo a minor. This bill will make it an offence to pierce any part of the body of a minor unless the minor is accompanied by a parent or guardian who provides consent. The bill extends the existing prohibition in section 21A to include tattooing and scarifying.

Scarification involves cutting the flesh or branding it with words, designs or the like, and this practice is becoming increasingly popular. This practice was not dealt with in a select committee report to which I will refer later. The history of bills regarding this matter dates back to 2001, when the member for Fisher introduced an almost identical bill.

It did pass through the Assembly but had not passed when parliament was prorogued for the 2002 election. In July 2002, John Rau introduced an extended bill which also included a provision requiring a three-day cooling-off period with medical codes of practice, etc.

The bill that the member for Enfield introduced passed the Assembly in October 2002, but it was amended in the other place before it lapsed. It was subsequently restored, amended and returned to the house in 2004. Thence, it was sent to a select committee, which produced an extensive report tabled on 19 October 2005. Although the report recommended legislation, the member for Enfield's bill was never progressed.

The member for Enfield's bill did expressly exclude the piercing of ear lobes, which I think is a sensible position to take. However, the original position taken by the Hon. Dennis Hood in the other place treated the piercing of ear lobes in the same way as piercing other parts of the body. In his view, all piercing is abhorrent and should be performed on a minor only in the presence of a parent.

However, there is nothing in the report of the select committee or any other material that suggests that piercing ear lobes is a practice that requires regulation. Our philosophy on this side of the house as Liberals is for minimal regulation and only where necessary. We favour freedom and parental responsibility ahead of compulsion.

However, a fair case has been made for treating body piercing in the same way as tattooing and scarification, and I do not think a case has been made for controlling the piercing of ear lobes. I note that the Hon. Dennis Hood accepted the amendment to exclude the piercing of ear lobes from the bill.

Over time, through your youth and moving forwards in life, you see some interesting piercings on people. It seems to be a habit of some young people to have so much metal in their heads that they would never get through an airport metal detector. You might see up to a dozen piercings in someone's face.

Personally, I do not find it very attractive. I ran into a person the other day who had quite a large metal object inserted into their cheek, which I thought was quite interesting and, consequently, I think it is a good thing that this bill will control what minors can do.

In tattooing, we have seen some interesting things. We have seen recently, in a TV ad, a grandmother showing an old faded tattoo. They are with you for life unless you go to a lot of trouble, and I think you would still be scarred to some extent from removing them. People need to be aware of what is involved in piercing. I have certainly been made aware of people piercing themselves in some very interesting places for all sorts of reasons, and that should be regulated under this bill as well. I commend the bill with amendment.

Debate adjourned on motion of Mrs Geraghty.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT