Page 2787 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 14 August 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
the ACT so that the Territory can administer those claims. Rather than pay all moneys received since 1950 from corporate activities in the Territory, the Commonwealth has acknowledged that the ACT is not liable for any claims which relate to the period prior to self-government. My officers have advised the ACT Treasury to reserve its position on this matter as there is an argument that supports an ACT entitlement to all moneys received by the Commonwealth since 1950. The issue is an important one as the majority of unclaimed moneys apparently become a windfall to Government revenue as few claims are lodged. I see that my Treasurer is moving closer to me at this very moment.
While this transfer of functions is a significant development for the ACT, I remain unconvinced that the Commonwealth has treated the ACT fairly in the area of adequate powers to monitor corporate activities. I am supportive of a strong national regulatory body which will enforce higher standards of accountability and ethics on our now tarnished corporate sector, but I deplore the effective exclusion of an ACT Minister from having full membership in such important bodies as the Ministerial Council for Companies and Securities.
The Opposition may find this amusing, but recently in Alice Springs the Federal and State Attorneys, with the exclusion of the ACT, hammered out an agreement on constitutional, legal and administrative arrangements to deal with companies and securities. The ACT has a right to expect that the ACT Government will have an effective voice to be heard on matters which affect their financial investments in companies operating in the ACT. Certainly, the residents of the ACT should press to have section 23(1)(h) of the self-government Act, referred to by my legal colleague Mr Connolly, reviewed in its impact, not only on their rights to have a say in the conduct of the corporate sector in the ACT but on the prospects of the ACT itself securing the rightful revenue it should from those activities. On behalf of the Alliance Government and, hopefully, all members of the Assembly, I urge the Commonwealth to remove that preclusion in our self-government Act which prevents the ACT Assembly from passing laws on companies and securities.
That preclusion presents the ACT with very real difficulties. For example, we have recently seen the making of a Commonwealth ordinance which was necessary to tidy up shortcomings in our own Co-Operative Societies Act 1939. The ACT was unable to amend its own legislation a few weeks ago because the subject matter of the Companies (Registered Societies) Ordinance 1990 related to companies and securities. This is an insoluble situation while section 23(1)(h) remains in its current form on the Federal statute books.
Mr Acting Speaker, I firmly support this package of legislation. I take the opportunity to express our
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .