Page 3365 - Week 13 - Tuesday, 24 November 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
That is a process which I believe ensures the maximum fairness, gives a voice to those who have something to contribute to that process, and is supplemented by all the other steps within the Bill which allow for public consultation and public access to that process. I commend that process to the house.
MR STEVENSON (8.34): I think it worthy of note that Mr Humphries has tabled some 77 amendments. It was the intention of the Labor Party to have this Bill passed seven days after it was tabled. At that time the vast majority of the amendments that now lie on the table were not drawn. The concerns that they raise were not known about. I note that Mr Lamont raises his eyes towards the heavens. Is that for some godly guidance perhaps, or is it because one is not supposed to mention these things? The Labor Party tries to ram Bills through so fast that people often do not even know that they have gone through until they start to bite by way of charges in the community or for some other reason. I think it is of some concern that repeatedly we get the same thing happening. Members in this Assembly are not given time to understand fully and to draft amendments to Bills, let alone members of the public.
MR MOORE (8.36): I have difficulty letting go by what Mr Stevenson said about drafting amendments and the amount of time for this Bill. I think members were sent a series of amendments by one group in the community called the Residents Rally, or something like that. We also have before us three very powerful amendments that I have drawn up and that are very important and 77 amendments from Mr Humphries. I think that we have not had a problem with that.
Mr Stevenson: When did you draw them?
MR MOORE: I drew them some time ago, but they were formally redrafted by Parliamentary Counsel to put them in an appropriate form. I note the date "17.11.92" on the amendment sheet that has been circulated.
MS FOLLETT (Chief Minister and Treasurer) (8.37): The Government will not be opposing this set of amendments moved by Mr Humphries. On my reading of them, what Mr Humphries is proposing is to draw together what my original Bill had set up as two separate bodies, namely the commission and the redistribution committee. Instead of that arrangement, Mr Humphries is putting forward that the redistribution committee should include the commission. A lot of the clauses referred to by Mr Humphries then reflect a redrafting, a wording change. It looks like a monumental set of amendments; but it is, in fact, a fairly straightforward one which is simply to combine those bodies, and one which we will not be opposing.
MR MOORE (8.38): I point out, Madam Speaker, that I appreciated having the opportunity to discuss these issues at length with Mr Humphries, Ms Follett and Ms Szuty. Therefore I am quite happy to accept these amendments, which I think are very sensible. They have been part of the process of working out how we can approach this type of Bill.
Amendments and proposed new clauses agreed to.
Clauses, as amended, agreed to.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .