Page 653 - Week 02 - Thursday, 21 February 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
a hairdresser, to come along to a person's home and give them a haircut or a perm, as it turned out, it would be a requirement, would it not, for the hairdresser, under this - - -
Mr Collaery: No.
MR STEVENSON: Well, once again, it is solicited business. It includes via the telephone. Once again, we are talking about the - - -
Mr Kaine: If Dennis knocks on my door and wants to give me a haircut, I am not going to let him in.
MR STEVENSON: I would do an excellent job, Mr Chief Minister. Let us have a look at the interpretation clause. On page 2, it says:
"door-to-door trading" means the trading practice under which -
(a) a person -
(i) goes from place to place; or
(ii) makes telephone calls;
... ... ...
So how can you tell me that soliciting business by the telephone is not included in this area?
Mr Duby: That is not what you described. You described someone ringing a hairdresser and asking them to come to their home.
MR STEVENSON: No, a hairdresser ringing someone and making an appointment on the telephone. Once again, it is all very well to say that these things do not matter; but what you are creating is offences for people operating, for people who go to other people's places, be they teaching them how to exercise, et cetera. You are creating offences for these people. You are saying, "If you make an unsolicited telephone call and the person agrees to something, and if you go along there and they spend more than $50, you have to supply them with various literature". That is what the Bill says. No-one has said anything to the contrary when I have made those specific points.
So, for a start, $50 is too low. It should be $200. It would seem that many people drafting these regulations do not mind what the side effects are, provided their overall instruction is achieved. I see that again and again. I see Bills that are written to achieve certain things. I do agree that in the vast majority of cases they do achieve those particular requirements set up for them by the Minister, or by the person requiring the Bill to be drafted. What is not looked at is the ramifications, under various situations, of what we have done. These things have not been looked at. So, we have a situation that it is only $50. We also have
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .