Page 2798 - Week 09 - Thursday, 26 August 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I note that the grounds for application to the Supreme Court or for a statement of reasons are not affected by this Bill. Only the question of standing is covered by this Bill. The Territory Plan, which the Minister referred to today as having been set in stone or at least in reasonably quick drying concrete - - -
Mr Wood: Nearly there.
MR HUMPHRIES: Almost there - the concrete is drying very rapidly. The plan has some considerable bearing on the question of the grounds on which one makes an application to the court.
I note also, Madam Speaker, that the financial impact of this Bill is not considered in the explanatory memorandum. It would seem to me, Madam Speaker, that there would be, as a result of this legislation, some increase in the number of people who would be empowered to make application to the Supreme Court under the design and siting legislation. It would seem to me also that it follows from that that there would be some impact, some not insignificant impact, even on the basis of a small number of people making application to the court, on the ACT budget. I do not know whether that is an oversight or an optimistic outlook; but I would ask the question, perhaps rhetorically, whether this would not entail some considerable change in the financial position of the Territory, as a result of this new right in people to have standing in front of the courts in design and siting applications.
MR CONNOLLY (Attorney-General, Minister for Housing and Community Services and Minister for Urban Services) (4.48), in reply: Madam Speaker, I thank the Opposition for their support. As Mr Humphries says, this extends the standing for people to challenge certain decisions of agencies under this Government. It is just another example, Mr Humphries, of this open, accountable Government bringing forward measures in this Assembly to make ourselves more open and more accountable. I am pleased that it has Opposition support.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill agreed to in principle.
Leave granted to dispense with the detail stage.
Bill agreed to.
BIRTH (EQUALITY OF STATUS) (AMENDMENT) BILL 1993
Debate resumed from 25 March 1993, on motion by Mr Connolly:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
MR HUMPHRIES (4.49): Madam Speaker, when we first saw the Birth (Equality of Status) (Amendment) Bill we had great hopes. We thought that this might be a wonderful landmark piece of legislation ushering in major reforms, striking a blow against the stigma of illegitimacy in the Territory; but I am afraid, Madam Speaker, that we have been disappointed. Even in the most fevered fantasy of a ministerial speech writer, it would be hard to describe this as a major reform.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .