Page 3133 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 15 September 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR CONNOLLY (Attorney-General, Minister for Housing and Community Services and Minister for Urban Services) (4.30), in reply: I thank Mr Kaine for his courtesy in complimenting the government officers who were responsible for putting the paper together. We have had a number of very high-quality discussion papers on human rights issues from that section and this is certainly no exception. It stands, I think, in very marked contrast with the comments Ms Szuty made a few minutes before, although not in terms of courtesy. Ms Szuty was not being discourteous, but she noted that the Bill we just considered - - -
Debate interrupted.
ADJOURNMENT
MADAM SPEAKER: Order! It being 4.30 pm, I propose the question:
That the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mr Connolly: I require the question to be put forthwith without debate.
Question resolved in the negative.
AGE DISCRIMINATION
Paper
Debate resumed.
MR CONNOLLY: Ms Szuty correctly commented that the previous Bill was extremely difficult to read and difficult to comprehend, and this discussion paper and the annexed draft legislation, I think, in contrast, were very clear and simple to understand. Mr Kaine's comments about what is happening are properly made. The department did widely circulate this discussion paper when it was tabled. We received some 20 written submissions, we held a public hearing which attracted some considerable community interest, and we received many telephone calls from members of the community. Draft legislation in the discussion paper is currently under review and the plan is to have legislation before this Assembly in November. So, Mr Kaine, we are certainly hoping to get this legislation through this year.
Most States and Territories, as is said in the discussion paper, have similar legislation, and since the discussion paper was tabled New South Wales has indicated that it is now looking at more general age discrimination provisions, in addition to the mere bar on age retirement. It would appear that New South Wales is moving along similar lines to those proposed in the ACT legislation.
We got some quite diverse views as a result of the public consultation process, as is to be expected. Some responders, while giving general support, felt that the legislation did not go far enough and, surprisingly, some felt that some of the changes were far too far reaching. We will have to deal with those divisions
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .