Page 1442 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 17 April 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR COLLAERY: It is much easier, Mr Speaker, in my experience, to get a break at the bar table than it is here. Fortified by aqua, I will finalise my speech. Mr Connolly suggested that a similar deemed disallowance provision could be put into the ACT planning package. I formally inform the house that we will not accede to that, for the reasons that I have outlined. Nevertheless, we support the Bills and are very pleased to see this new Assembly take a vital appearance in the parliamentary order in this nation.
MS MAHER (11.44): Mr Speaker, I rise today, in my capacity as presiding member of the Standing Committee on Scrutiny of Bills and Subordinate Legislation, to support the Subordinate Laws (Amendment) Bill 1991. Firstly, I would also like to welcome Professor Whalan to the Assembly. I commend him for the work that he does in his advisory capacity to the committee. It was only yesterday that a piece of legislation was presented in the house and he commented on it last night. This enabled us to do a report this morning, which will be presented to the Assembly later.
This Bill, although small in size, is very important for the Legislative Assembly. Mr Connolly, in his presentation speech, quite rightly, pointed this out when he said that this Bill strengthens the hand of the parliament as a whole. I would point out that it also strengthens the hand of the Standing Committee on Scrutiny of Bills and Subordinate Legislation in that usually it will be as a result of the committee's deliberations that a decision will be made by the Assembly as to whether a piece of subordinate legislation should be disallowed.
As members are aware, the committee has been in operation for only a relatively short time. As yet, the committee has not moved a motion for disallowance, although Mr Berry has done so this morning. However, there may come a time when the committee considers that a piece of subordinate legislation infringes one or more of the principles set out in the committee's resolution of appointment. I remind members that these principles relate to whether the legislation unduly trespasses on rights or makes rights, liberties and/or obligations dependent on non-renewable decisions, amongst other things.
Under the current legislation, if the committee finds that a piece of subordinate legislation is contrary to the committee's resolution of appointment and a motion of disallowance is moved, there is no guarantee that that motion would be debated and considered during the 15 days that the Assembly has to disallow the law. Put simply, it could just remain at the bottom of the notice paper and never be called on. Therefore, the current disallowance power of the Assembly relies, to a large extent, on the cooperation of the executive of the day. This is similar to the disallowance powers of some of the other States and
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .