Page 3087 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 10 September 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
We could draft a transitional clause into the Bill now, but I do not think we should. I suggest that the Attorney gazette this provision on 20 September, to allow for the notice of motion that is required, which in the court is 14 clear days, meaning that no-one could be prejudiced by travelling here, having paid filing fees. The Attorney should give thought to using the cut-off date of 20 September. I have not had time to put my mind fully to that matter because it occurred to me only shortly before we resumed on the matter this evening.
I commend the Bill to the house. It has the support of the Residents Rally. I do want to say one thing, however: It is not a discriminatory law; it does exclude a number of people from a number of jurisdictions, but there is nothing inconsistent in that process. There may well be suggestions that we have favoured New Zealanders, however. I am sure that it will be anxiously examined by all those who seek to find discriminations in the law, but I believe that our Anzac connections and the closer economic relationship that the Federal Government has forged with the New Zealand Government give us the scope to argue that it is proper that there be certain provisions with respect to New Zealanders and not with respect to others. It is another small step in cutting some ties with the Old Country, however, and there may well be comments in that regard.
MR CONNOLLY (Attorney-General, Minister for Housing and Community Services and Minister for Urban Services) (8.07), in reply: I thank Mr Stefaniak and Mr Collaery for their comments. I take particular note of Mr Collaery's suggestion that we seek to have this Bill brought into law on the 20th. Certainly, this Bill has been intended to prevent the use of the ACT as a back door to get admission in an Australian jurisdiction, and we have been somewhat out of line with practice in the States. There is no question but that the profession and the community have been broadly warned that the Government's clear intention is to bring this law into force, and I would agree that there would be no prejudice should we do that. I will pay particular care to achieve that. I believe that this Bill will achieve the goals set out in the introduction speech and I thank members for their support.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill agreed to in principle.
Leave granted to dispense with the detail stage.
Bill agreed to.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .