Page 2965 - Week 10 - Thursday, 15 September 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Another issue relating to section 33 is whether the court has the power to alter conditions when continuing bail. Section 33 is unclear on this issue, although the words in subsection (5) - "The court may make such other orders as to bail ... as the court thinks fit" - might be interpreted as giving the court the power to change conditions. The Bill proposes to amend section 33 to include an express power to amend conditions when continuing bail. There are many situations where an accused appears before a court after bail has been already granted and the court neglects to make any further directions as to bail. In those situations, bail should be deemed to be continued, and the Bill contains an amendment to that effect. The words "continue" and "extend" are used interchangeably throughout section 33, and the Bill contains amendments to standardise usage to "continue".
The Bill contains a number of other minor amendments which will change the Bail Act so that the term "undertaking" is used with only the one meaning, namely, the undertaking to appear, and that the term "agreement" is used to describe the undertaking as to conduct. It is clear that persons caught by the exceptions in section 7 may be considered for bail under section 8. The exception in paragraph 7(3)(a) is restricted to prior breaches of bail relating to the same offence. The redundant references to prisoners not being allowed bail are omitted from sections 7 and 8. There is a general reference in section 5. The Minister may approve forms which the Act currently requires to be prescribed by regulation. I commend the Bill to the members of the Assembly. Madam Speaker, I present the explanatory memorandum to the Bill.
Debate (on motion by Mr Humphries) adjourned.
DRUGS OF DEPENDENCE (AMENDMENT) BILL (NO. 2) 1994
MR CONNOLLY (Attorney-General and Minister for Health) (10.38): Madam Speaker, I present the Drugs of Dependence (Amendment) Bill (No. 2) 1994.
Title read by Clerk.
MR CONNOLLY: I move:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
The ACT, in common with most other Australian governments, provides a diversionary process for people convicted of a crime which may be related to their dependence on drugs. It is obviously preferable that where a dependency on drugs drives people to crime we should treat the cause, the dependency; not the symptom, the crime. This does not mean that we ignore the crime and the associated penalties; however, the opportunity to encourage treatment should be seized where possible. The ACT was a national leader in setting up alternative processes by providing treatment assessment panels for drug dependent individuals who have been convicted of a crime. Three panels are currently operating under the Drugs of Dependence Act 1989 - two for adult offenders and one for juvenile offenders. These panels assess whether individuals are dependent on drugs and
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .