Page 5617 - Week 17 - Thursday, 5 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
incorporated into our legislation. Let me remind you also that last year, I understand - no, it was this year - the Attorney-General's Department had a look at this clause and agreed with it after proposing one amendment which has been incorporated into the legislation.
The matters in clause 151 are important if we are to run a panel or an inquiry. It does need certain powers. If a significant concern arises, the powers that some object to here will be needed. If you have not given us these powers, it will be no good starting an inquiry and saying, "We now need to search premises". You will have to stop the inquiry and start another one under the Inquiries Act or by some other means. You simply would not be able to have any effective inquiry at all.
I am a little surprised by people who have long expressed concern about some events, or perceived events, in the community and who would now seek to remove this quite important measure. I concede that it looks a little draconian in print; but, in fact, it will not be that. I repeat what I said yesterday: These powers of the panel will be used only for matters of the greatest importance, matters of great significance, such as major pollution or potential pollution - things of that nature.
MR KAINE (Leader of the Opposition) (11.23): Mr Deputy Speaker, I can see that this kind of provision can cause some concern in people's minds as to just what is intended. It does seem strange, on the face of it, in a Bill that talks about land management, that we are allowing police powers to people who are not police officers; but I accept that there is a justification for it.
What we are talking about here is inquiries instituted by the Minister. First of all, the Minister is not going to institute an inquiry unless there is a very serious matter to be inquired into. It is not the sort of thing that is going to be started off by a Minister every day in the week, and an inquiry is not going to be convened to deal with trivial matters. We are talking about situations where a significant, important matter arises that raises questions about something that has happened in the planning process. Under those circumstances I concede that, if you establish such an inquiry, it has to have the necessary powers to do its job.
I suppose an alternative to this would have been to say that when such an inquiry is needed we will convene an inquiry under the Inquiries Act. That would have put the same provisions into effect because, under the Inquiries Act, once an inquiry is initiated the inquiry has all the powers that we are talking about here. So, it might have been just as easy to do it that way, but I do not think that that is necessary. As I say, we are not talking about something that is going to be convened every day in the week; nor will an inquiry be set up into matters that are trivial. I am prepared to allow this through.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .