Page 1439 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 17 April 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
disallowance in relation to what might be a perfectly acceptable planning instrument could possibly make, in those circumstances, a mockery of the consultation process. We need to be aware, in that context, of the amount of public money and time involved in the development of new planning proposals together with public interest in the issues, which would make the process attractive to a so-minded member of the Assembly who simply wished to make political capital by forcing the Government to debate every planning issue, no matter how minor.
In my view - in terms of deemed disallowance of planning instruments - Mr Connolly, if he is still in this place, might care to bring this proposal back after we have seen how our planning package works over the next two or three years. At this stage, we believe that that overlay and an overexuberant member of this Assembly wishing, as I said, to make political capital rather than planning sense out of this, could seriously delay matters that lie more principally in the public interest.
Mr Speaker, the Bill presented by Mr Connolly proposes an amendment, in effect, to section 6 of the parent Subordinate Laws Act 1989. To summarise the situation, section 6(1) of that Act presently provides that a subordinate law must be laid before the Assembly within 15 sitting days after the date of notification of the law in the Gazette. Section 6(7) of the same provision provides that, if the Legislative Assembly passes a resolution disallowing the law or a provision of the law within 15 sitting days after the subordinate law has been laid before it, the law or the provision will cease to have effect.
To summarise, the amendment proposed in the Bill which we are currently debating is based on section 48(5) of the Commonwealth Acts Interpretation Act 1901. The primary effect of this amendment will be that a subordinate law will be deemed to be disallowed if a motion of disallowance has been called on in relation to a subordinate law that has been tabled in the Assembly, but the motion has not been dealt with by the Assembly.
Of course, if there is no notice of motion or disallowance given within the specified 15 sitting days, the deemed disallowance provisions are not activated. We agree with this process. The amendment will, of course, provide a powerful inducement to the government of the day to ensure that any motion to disallow subordinate legislation is debated and that the issue is resolved in one way or another. Our Government recognises that such an amendment would serve the interests of democracy by ensuring that no government may subvert debate in the Assembly on items of subordinate legislation which may be objectionable.
It is somewhat unlikely that a government would survive if it did not bring on for debate any outstanding notice of motion without the provisions set out in this Bill. Members should note that the Bill will also provide a clear
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .