Page 1708 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 30 April 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Speaker, you and other members of the Assembly might properly wonder how such a situation might be justified. I can only say that it was indicative of the haphazard way in which the Commonwealth governed the Territory before self-government. Following the demise of the ACT Law Reform Commission in the mid 1970s, the burden of law reform in the Territory passed from a local body to a national body, the Australian Law Reform Commission. That commission produced a number of reforms for the ACT - reforms which led to legislation dealing with children, complaints against the police, breathalysers and human tissue transplants.
Notwithstanding these reforms, some have criticised this commission for proposing unrealistic and expensive solutions to legal problems. Others have criticised the way in which it singled out the ACT for radical social reform without the consent of the people of the Territory, such as to make this Territory a social laboratory, in a manner of speaking. It is true that the commission has not always addressed the financial implications of reform proposals.
The commission has always attempted to give government the best legal option rather than the option which government can afford. Whilst we cannot and should not condone the commission's activities in proposing laws which were implemented without the consent of the people of the Territory, we can note that the commission always attempted to gauge community views. The greatest failing of the commission was not of its own making. Again, as with the earlier ACT Law Reform Commission, the Commonwealth dithered and delayed the implementation of the reports of the Australian Law Reform Commission.
The vital reforms of the Australian Law Reform Commission dealing with child welfare waited for six years before they were implemented. Much of the careful work of the commissioner, Nick Seddon, under the community law reform program was unimplemented on self-government. We should not be surprised at the systematic neglect of ACT laws by the Commonwealth, for neglect it was. It was not a case of the Commonwealth looking at a report and then, as is the prerogative of all governments, deciding to reject the report. No, the Commonwealth seems to have simply ignored the reports, regardless of their intrinsic merit.
Following self-government, the Australian Law Reform Commission has continued to show a keen interest in reform in the Territory. We welcome this interest, and look forward to joint initiatives of our Community Law Reform Committee and the commission. Unfortunately, in its efforts to reform the law, the Australian Law Reform Commission has recently suggested that the Commonwealth should use the reserve Territories power to make de facto legislation in the ACT.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .