Page 2369 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 22 June 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
if the Assembly takes grave exception to what is in those standards if another group is added, then presumably we could amend that by amending the Act at the time. In the meantime, as we keep hearing from the Liberals, let the managers manage. Give them the capacity to add to the standards another target group if the commissioner believes that that is appropriate.
MR KAINE (4.26): Madam Speaker, I could not disagree with the Chief Minister more. These are not decisions that the commissioner or any other public servant should make. Whether or not a certain group within the community should be recognised as requiring special treatment is a matter of policy. It is not a matter for a public servant to determine. I am interested that the Chief Minister says that the commissioner will decide this.
I am more intrigued the further we go through this document. From time to time it uses the words "declared by the management standards". These management standards are pretty nebulous. They are going to do a great many things. Quite frankly, I have not seen one yet. Yet we are relying on these management standards to define a great deal that is going to determine how this organisation operates. That does not tell me that it is going to be the commissioner or anybody else. As I understand it, the management standards - and they are poorly defined - will have two parts. Some parts will be declarative and those parts will be instruments disallowable in this place. The other parts will be for information only and will not be subject to disallowance in this house. That is as I understand it, but I know only what I have been told by public servants. The Chief Minister has not attempted to explain what they are, where they are or why they are not before us with the Bill that we are discussing.
I do not accept the Chief Minister's bland statement that, if there emerges another group of people who need to be specifically defined in an Act as requiring special consideration, we should leave that to the public service to determine. I could not think of any worse way of dealing with the matter. I am surprised that the Chief Minister would attempt to defend her position on the basis that some undefined public servant who may or may not write a management standard at some future time should be allowed the total jurisdiction to determine a group that fits into this designated group category. It is totally alien to me, and I am amazed that the Chief Minister would put it forward in justification for her Bill. I am totally opposed to what is in this Bill. I support Mr Humphries's amendment, and I think any sensible person in this place would do the same.
MR MOORE (4.29): Madam Speaker, I will fit into Mr Kaine's definition of a sensible person. It seems to me that Mr Humphries has raised a significant issue. We are talking about discrimination. That is what this is about. It is critical for this Assembly to deal with the issue of discrimination at any time. Whilst I am pleased with the way this clause is set out, it seems to me that, if a new class of persons is to be declared a designated group - along with Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders and people of non-English-speaking background - in respect of whom a positive act is required in order to deal with discrimination, then this Assembly ought to be made clearly aware of it. We could deal with it by disallowance of the management standards. I believe that the management standards will be a very thick document, and we could well miss a new designated group. But there is some doubt about whether these standards will be disallowable instruments. That is something that we can deal with as we get further into the Bill.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .