The defeat, by just two Senate votes on Wednesday, of a bill that would have given Canberrans and Northern Territorians the right to decide whether or not assisted suicide should be legalised was disappointing.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
This was especially the case given one of the 36 votes against was cast by ACT Senator and former ACT Opposition leader, Zed Seselja.
If he had voted in favour of a bill that would have meant Canberrans were no longer second class citizens in their own country Senator Seselja could have tied the ballot.
He has justified his decision by saying he does not trust the ACT Legislative Assembly, of which he was once a senior member, to frame euthanasia laws that would protect Canberrans.
"This is not about territory rights, it's about human rights," Senator Seselja said in an opinion piece in The Canberra Times ahead of the vote. "I fear the passage of... the bill will lead to assisted suicide becoming legal in the ACT under a regime that will have minimal safeguards".
The Liberal senator, like the majority of those who voted against the bill, chose to make it a debate about euthanasia; not whether or not Canberrans and Northern Territory residents deserved the same rights to make laws that affected them in a deeply personal manner as people in other states.
One of the reasons so many chose to go down this path was because they could not come up with definitive and substantial arguments to justify one set of rules for the residents of Canberra or Darwin and another for the residents of Queanbeyan or Broome.
Attempts to justify the status quo on the basis neither the ACT nor the Northern Territory have a house of review that could oversee controversial legislation foundered on an obvious flaw.
Queensland does not have a house of review either. It abolished its upper house 96 years ago and still enjoys the same rights and privileges as other states.
On the plus side, the debate was extensive, emotionally charged, and uncharacteristically courteous and eloquent. The sincerity of those who took part, regardless of their position, was never in doubt.
It was particularly hard to listen to the testimony of speakers who had experienced loved ones reach a point where they wanted to end their lives at a time and a place of their own choosing only to be denied that right.
There are already moves afoot to introduce a very similar bill to Senator Leyonhjelm's in the House of Representatives.
It is also likely the next Federal election, now almost certainly less than 12 months away, will result in a significant change in the composition of the Senate.
Given the growing public awareness of the issue, the probability other states will follow Victoria in legislating for assisted suicide and the impending shakeup in the political landscape, it is only a matter of time before this issue returns.
