Page 4563 - Week 15 - Tuesday, 14 December 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
the package to 100 different community groups, professional associations, health registration boards, interested individuals and committees, medical defence funds and interstate agencies. The Assembly knows that 15 submissions were received from these individuals and groups who were interested enough in the establishment of the Health Complaints Unit to respond to the ACT Government formally and in writing, and I know of the content of those submissions, Mr Deputy Speaker, because I agreed to view them on a confidential basis.
While the Assembly knows, from the Minister for Health's presentation speech, that relevant amendments have been made to the Bill in the light of some of the comments concerning policy, the Assembly does not formally know of the exact outcome of the results of the submission process and whether those individuals and groups who went to the trouble of responding to the Government regarding this issue are totally happy and accepting of the outcome. I want to suggest now a process which I believe should have been followed with regard to the final determination of this matter.
The point that I would like to make, Mr Deputy Speaker, is that ultimately the Assembly is responsible for the passage of legislation in the ACT, not the ACT Government, which, in reality, as we know, does not have the numbers to decide any issue apart from a no-confidence motion proposed in the Chief Minister or the passage of the Supply and Appropriation Bills. I have said already that I support the Health Complaints Bill in principle, and I do. I believe in the concept of facilitating access by health consumers and residents of the ACT to health complaints mechanisms. But, as a member of this Assembly, I want to have access to all of the information which is available regarding the Bill. I really should not be placed in a position where I am expected to accept the Government's word that they have substantially addressed the issues which have been raised with them.
The Government, I believe, needs to accept that draft exposure legislation will be referred to the appropriate Legislative Assembly committee for inquiry and report. Should the Government consider this to be an unnecessary step in the process, or should the committee decide, for whatever reason, that it will not take up the reference, the submissions received should then be made available to Assembly members to view as a matter of course. The Government should make clear to individuals and groups intending to respond to draft exposure legislation that their submissions potentially could be viewed by all members of the Legislative Assembly. After all, as I have said before, the Assembly decides the fate of proposed legislation, not the ACT Government. Ideally, in this instance, I believe that the Social Policy Committee of the Assembly should have accepted the submissions received by the ACT Government in August and September of this year and recommended changes to the draft exposure legislation as a result of an open consultative process.
It remains unclear to me at this time whether those 15 individuals and groups are happy with the final format of the Bill or believe that they have had their concerns addressed. I did establish today, Mr Deputy Speaker, that copies of the final version of the legislation were distributed to those groups on 7 December, exactly one week ago. I further understand that the Minister sent all the individuals and groups who responded to the draft exposure legislation a letter of general thanks for their contribution but did not address specifically the issues that they had raised in connection with the legislation.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .