Page 4764 - Week 16 - Wednesday, 28 November 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
covered, as I am sure Mr Humphries mentioned, in section 88 of the Act. I commend that amendment to the house.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clauses 53 to 69, by leave, taken together, and agreed to.
Clause 70
MR COLLAERY (Attorney-General) (4.31): I heard the comments of Mr Connolly, endorsed by Mr Moore, in relation to retrospectivity. I do not believe that any responsible legislature would endorse retrospectivity except in the most profound circumstances, in the criminal jurisdiction particularly. That could constitute a great social evil. All I say is that my advice from the Registrar, who is sitting in the chamber today and advising me, is that there are no matters extant as of right now. The question of that event occurring, which is quite properly drawn to our attention by Professor Whalan, I am advised is impossible. But to aid all those proponents of extrinsic evidence being taken as an aid or almost an estoppel on governments, I do say on behalf of the Government that, were such an exigency to be arising now, whilst we are in the chamber - I accept the fact that the Registrar has been absent from his office for some time - or were something to have occurred in the last short time, I would indicate to the house and give an undertaking that this Government certainly would not institute prosecution action or charges or the like with respect to those matters alluded to by my colleagues across the chamber.
Debate interrupted.
ADJOURNMENT
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! It being past 4.30 pm, I propose the question:
That the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mr Collaery: Mr Deputy Speaker, I require the question to be put forthwith without debate.
Question resolved in the negative.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .