legislation before Christmas.

The long-awaited Stalking Act 1996 will not be debated until after the House of Assembly sits again in February.

Yesterday Physical Abuse Centre director Arleen Swan said: "I am disappointed.

"The feeling is that the sooner we get the legislation up and running the sooner we will get better protection for women.'' She added: "We have been discussing the legislation since the early part of this year.

"I thought it had reached the point where the community would accept such legislation.'' Honor Desmond Tetlow, the Women's Resource Centre lawyer, said: "I want to see the legislation in place as soon as possible.

"Any delay in passing it is not in our best interests or helpful.'' Home Affairs and Public Safety Minister Quinton Edness said he understood the concerns.

The Stalking Act was listed on the House of Assembly order paper for its second reading last Friday.

But Mr. Edness pointed out legislation usually remained on the order paper for at least two sessions before being debated.

"Since the Stalking Act had been put down the Friday before, we could only discuss it if everybody agreed to do so. Last Friday, however, we had another full day.

"If we had added that to the list we would have been in the House until the following morning.'' Last Friday -- the final sitting of the House before the Christmas break -- MPs spent most of their time debating new taxi fares and a "take note'' motion on Airport leases. The House broke up at about 10 p.m.

Mr. Edness said the Stalking Act had initially been tabled in the House some time ago.

But it was amended following suggestions from women's groups and others in the community.

"We've now put the Act right and it will be one of first items we discuss when we come back.

"I appreciate we've been waiting a long time for this, but it's important to get it right.'' Edness hints of amendments to anti-stalking legislation He added: "I think there have been some major improvements in dealing with, for example, the definition of stalking and the sentences. There may still have to be some more amendments.'' Mr. Edness said one amendment meant an applicant for a protection order did not necessarily have to be the person stalked.

Other amendments included: Extending the protection order from a maximum of six months to 12; and Imposing a prison term of up to three years or a maximum $5,000 fine -- or both -- for a stalker in breach of an order made under section 9A of the Matrimonial Proceedings (Magistrates' Courts) Act 1974, and a protection order under the Domestic Violence (Protection Orders) Act 1996.

The legislation defines stalking as: following someone; telephoning or sending electronic messages; interfering with property in the possession of the victim or a connected person; entering or loitering outside the home or workplace of the victim or a connected person; and keeping the victim or a connected person under surveillance.

Stalkers face up to 12 months in prison or a maximum $2,500 fine, or both.

Under the bill, people can be prosecuted if they intend to cause "physical or mental harm'' to their victims or induce "apprehension or fear''.

In addition, a new amendment means a person can face prosecution "when he knows that that conduct is likely to cause such harm to the victim or to induce in the victim such apprehension or fear''.

People upset by a court decision in proceedings under the Act can appeal to the Supreme Court.