David Norris (Independent)

What Senator Bacik has just said illustrates the value of this House and the value we place upon the kind of professional expertise we have here. I say as much without prejudice, as they say in legal circles, to the argument. It is important to recognise that the amendment which occurs first in the order is not the really significant one. It is amendment No. 50 that comes toward the end of the Bill that matters. Given the presumption of innocence, there should be at least an equal balance between the rights of the defendant and the rights of the prosecution. If the delicacy of this balance is altered, as has been suggested, by this amendment in favour of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, a State office, and against an individual, it would be regrettable. Senator Bacik is very wise to stay her hand and seek further consultation on this matter.

I refer to the Minister's comments in which he flagged the definition of broadcasting. This attracted my attention because I wondered if it was sufficiently clear in view of the extraordinary pace of advances in broadcasting. For example, the use of the term "wireless telegraphy" is nowadays regarded as charmingly antique. We have been overcome by a whole series of patterns of broadcasting. It is very appropriate and I welcome the fact the Minister has updated that definition.

The Minister referred to definitions and there is also a definition of a "children detention school". Perhaps there could be some debate on the appropriateness of some of these places in light of what we know now. I do not believe it should simply appear as a definition. We should examine whether it is appropriate to send children to these places, but that is just bye the bye. I welcome what Senator Bacik said.