HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)
2011-02-22 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

TATTOOING INDUSTRY

Ms FOX (Bright) (15:46): Thank you. I would just like to point out that I am not turning 51, as is the member for Light today—but I am turning 40, so well done me!

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! Member for Bright, ask your question.

Ms FOX: Can the Attorney-General inform the house about progress of the consultation on proposals to regulate the tattooing and body piercing industry?

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Justice, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Tourism, Minister for Food Marketing) (15:47): Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. I thank the honourable member for her question. I know that this is a matter of great interest to the honourable member, and, indeed, others.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! Too much information!

The Hon. J.R. RAU: She is interested in this very important matter. As members would be aware, a draft bill and discussion paper in relation to this matter was circulated some time ago, and last Friday represented the closing date for comments by members of the public about this issue.

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. J.R. RAU: I could tell some stories about experiences about this which have been relayed to me over the course of the last few weeks, but I have decided not to. In any event, it is intended that legislation in relation to this matter will be ready for introduction shortly. However, I would like to tell everybody that the contributions that have been made—

Ms Chapman: Two?

The Hon. J.R. RAU: No, actually there were more than that.

Ms Chapman: Five?

The Hon. J.R. RAU: I think even more than five. We could play 20 questions.

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. J.R. RAU: No. I think there were a number. I do not want to mislead anyone on the exact number, but, if it is important, I will get back to them, but there were more than two—in fact, more than 10, I suspect. Anyway, the point is that we are going to read them very, very carefully and, as always, take into account the contributions made by people who have taken the trouble to read out suggestions and taken the time to make comments on them.

We have even received a petition, which in some respects is critical of the draft and which contains some interesting names. But what I thought I would say is that a range of people have got back to us; and, interestingly enough, the AMA took some time to read the proposals, and members opposite in particular might be interested to know that its only criticism was that it was not stern enough. I think that we are in fairly good company if the AMA thinks that what we are doing is on the right track.

I just wanted to make it clear that there are some parameters around this. The first one is that the legislation, whatever it is, will not—and I emphasise this—will not limit choices for informed adults. So, informed adults, of which all of you are an example, will be able to do whatever they were able to do before the legislation came in; it will be okay to go off and do it. Look! Late bulletin: 30 submissions—three, zero. This is right up to date. As of this moment there are 30 of them.

Mr Williams: So that's one of them?

The Hon. J.R. RAU: No, that's just a letter about them; that's 30. The point is that all of you as informed adults will have none of your choices removed from you. So, any of you, if you have not got around to having a treatment or something done, relax, it is going to be okay. Even if this thing goes through, you are all going to be able to do what you wanted to do.

The second thing that I think is important for people to understand is that there is a certain misapprehension out there somewhere that it is okay at the moment to tattoo a child and that we are somehow trying to change that. As the honourable member for Bragg certainly knows, it is illegal now and will continue to be illegal. There is no horrifying change about that.

There are people out there who are tattooing children, and that is part of the reason why the proposals say that the penalty for doing that is to be increased, to make people think a little bit more about it. It is also the reason why we are saying to people who are in this particular field of endeavour, 'If you want to tattoo somebody who looks like they might be a child and you do not ask for proof of age, then you don't really have a defence if there is a prosecution going forward.' I think it is entirely reasonable. Their proof of age material needs to be kept so that, in the event of there being an issue, they can say, 'Well, look, here's why I did it; here's my reason.' And I think that's entirely fair.

There is a requirement in the draft bill for parental consent for certain types of piercing. I think it is fair to say that this is where the arguments have been basically coming in, whether one should be able to have a serviette thing put in one's ear—a serviette holder; that is the extreme end of the options available—and at the other end there is just a simple stud. We are happy with a simple stud, but we have concerns about the serviette holder. That is a debate that we are going to be having shortly and maybe in this chamber, who knows.

Importantly, we are raising the issue of intoxicated people not having consent to be able to submit to any of these processes. Again, that seems entirely reasonable to me. The impact on responsible operators will be minimal because I believe that most of them are conducting themselves appropriately in any event.

In due course, I will be getting back to the house after we have had an opportunity to consider the 30-odd submissions—

Ms Chapman interjecting:

The Hon. J.R. RAU: No, we've started looking at them. I would be happy to discuss this important matter with any members opposite who have a particular interest in the matter. If the member for Bragg would like to see the AMA's submission, they are very supportive of this; in fact, they want us to take matters even further.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! Could members who are having conversation in the background keep their voices down? I heard some interesting conversations then. The member for Davenport.

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