Page 1709 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 30 April 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
We do not welcome unilateral proposals by the Australian Law Reform Commission to the Commonwealth Government that the Commonwealth should start again to make laws in the Territory without the consent of the ACT people. The Commonwealth Government does not have either a political or a moral mandate to make such legislation. There is no justification for such proposals following self-government, and we distance ourselves from the proposals.
Mr Speaker, I commend the Bills to the house. I thank the members for their comments, and I record again this historic moment when this Territory sets its path on its own scheduled law reform commission route.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill agreed to in principle.
Leave granted to dispense with the detail stage.
Bill agreed to.
LAW REFORM (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) (AMENDMENT) BILL 1991
Debate resumed from 18 April 1991, on motion by Mr Collaery:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
MR CONNOLLY (9.26): Mr Speaker, the Opposition is also supportive of this Bill and I would, effectively, repeat the comments that I made earlier in relation to the work of the Community Law Reform Committee. I must apologise that I was not aware that Judge Kelly was sitting in the chamber at the time.
Mr Speaker, in concluding the previous debate, the Attorney took the opportunity of making a fairly broad statement of policy in relation to the process of law reform. While I suppose I should really read it in Hansard and study it before making a considered response, I think I could say that broadly the Opposition would agree with his comments. The process of law reform works well only if you have an agent for reform - a law reform committee or commission, whatever you call it - that is in touch with and responsive to community demands, and a legislature that will listen to that committee.
The problem in the past in the ACT has been that, while we have had the agent for change, we have not had a legislature that has been particularly concerned with it. It is notorious that under Commonwealth governments of whatever political persuasion - and I did not take Mr Collaery's remarks to be a partisan attack on Commonwealth Labor governments as much as a general criticism of Commonwealth governments of either political persuasion -
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .