Page 2820 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 13 September 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
SCRUTINY OF BILLS AND SUBORDINATE LEGISLATION -
STANDING COMMITTEE
Report and Statements
MRS GRASSBY: I present report No. 13 of 1994 of the Standing Committee on Scrutiny of Bills and Subordinate Legislation. I seek leave to make a brief statement.
Leave granted.
MRS GRASSBY: Report No. 13 of 1994, which I have just presented, was circulated when the Assembly was not sitting, on 2 September 1994, pursuant to the resolution of appointment of 27 March 1992. I commend the report to the Assembly.
I would like to respond to comments that were made about our committee, which are rather serious. I know that other members of the committee wish to speak about them also. I put out a press release about the Bill introduced by Mr Stevenson. In it I said that recent comments have been made, both in the Assembly and elsewhere, concerning the examination of the Electors Initiative and Referendum Bill 1994 [No. 2] by the Standing Committee on Scrutiny of Bills and Subordinate Legislation. Those comments have suggested that, because the committee did not comment on the constitutional validity of the proposed legislation, it was therefore valid. It has been further commented that the result of a referendum under the proposed legislation would therefore be binding on the Assembly, provided the Assembly wants to pass the legislation.
The standing committee has terms of reference which set out what the committee can examine in relation to each Bill presented to the Assembly. I wish to point out that it is not within the terms of reference of the committee to say whether or not the Bill can make referendum results binding on the Assembly. The committee has specific terms of reference relating to personal rights and liberties, inappropriately delegating legislative provisions and other matters relating to technical scrutiny of legislation. The constitutional validity of any legislation passed by the Assembly is not for the committee to determine; rather, it is for the courts, who must decide whether any law passed by the Assembly is valid. I think we all respect the separation of powers. It is not incumbent upon the committee, which I chair, to make a decision of a constitutional nature. I wanted to clarify the statements that Mr Stevenson had been making to the effect that the committee does have that power.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .