Page 2222 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 6 June 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
One possible administrative difficulty which could arise from the use of the New South Wales scheme is that the certificate is valid for only two days. While a Sydney consumer can slip out to Parramatta and pick up a certificate, the Canberra would-be purchaser may be in some difficulty in obtaining the certificate through the post. Perhaps the Attorney could examine administrative arrangements to have some sort of on-line facility for the certificate to be picked up in the ACT.
The Opposition would endorse the remarks of the Attorney-General that we should in general be cautious about adopting New South Wales legislation holus-bolus into the ACT. We have been trying to disentangle our legislation from that in New South Wales and, generally speaking, we should not go in the reverse direction. In this case, however, we have an effective operational scheme working across the border. It is clearly cheaper and more convenient to borrow that legislative scheme and bring it into place in the ACT. Therefore, the Opposition supports this move.
I suggest, however, that this may not always be appropriate. I note that in its 1989-90 annual report the National Association of Finance Companies, which has long supported this type of legislation, has made the comment that at the end of this year this type of legislation will be in place in every State but that there are no arrangements for uniformity between the States in respect of the legislation, apart from the fact that the Northern Territory and now the Australian Capital Territory have come under the umbrella of the New South Wales scheme. Clearly, there would be advantage in a uniform scheme. The National Association of Finance Companies said in its recent annual report:
However, by far the biggest disappointment has been the inability of governments to provide either a uniform or harmonised basis for the administration of the registers. Accordingly, it is possible for vehicles to move across State and Territory borders to be re-registered in another State and then be lost among the many vehicles within those new borders.
This is unsatisfactory, and I venture to suggest that, unless the States and Territories act to bring about uniformity, the Commonwealth - which clearly has adequate constitutional power in this area from amongst other heads of power, the corporations power - may itself legislate.
If we believe that this is an appropriate area for State and Territory legislation, which it has clearly proved to be so far, and, if the States would prefer to keep this as a subject of State legislation rather than force the Commonwealth to take over an unruly and uncoordinated scheme, it is incumbent on State Attorneys-General to work
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .