Page 4156 - Week 13 - Thursday, 10 November 1994

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .

AS MEMBERS WILL APPRECIATE, MOST CASES ARE SETTLED AT THE LEVEL OF AN INVESTIGATION OR IN CONCILIATION. RELATIVELY FEW CASES GO ON TO FORMAL HEARING OR TO REVIEW BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL. SOME CASES HAVE NOW GONE TO HEARING AND THE QUESTION OF DISCLOSURE OF CONCILIATION DISCUSSIONS HAS BEEN RAISED. IT IS CONSIDERED THAT THIS QUESTION SHOULD NOW BE CLARIFIED IN THE LEGISLATION TO ENSURE THAT STAFF CAN RELIABLY GIVE THE NECESSARY ASSURANCES TO PARTIES.

THE AMENDMENT IS BASED ON SIMILAR PROVISIONS IN OTHER AUSTRALIAN ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LAWS. UNDER THE AMENDMENT, ANYTHING SAID OR DONE IN CONCILIATION PROCEEDINGS IS NOT ADMISSIBLE IN SUBSEQUENT PROCEEDINGS UNDER THE DISCRIMINATION ACT OR IN A REVIEW OF THE DISCRIMINATION COMMISSIONERS DECISIONS BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL.

THIS PROVISION DOES NOT AFFECT THE QUALITY OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL REVIEW. CONCILIATION IS NOT SUBJECT TO SUCH REVIEW AS IT DOES NOT INVOLVE ANY DECISION-MAKING BY THE COMMISSIONER.

EFFECTIVE CONCILIATION IS CRUCIAL TO THE OPERATION OF THE

DISCRIMINATION ACT. THIS AMENDMENT WILL ENSURE THAT

PARTIES WILL CONTINUE TO ENTER THE PROCESS WITHOUT FEAR

THAT THEIR CASE MAY BE PREJUDICED BY WHAT THEY SAY IN

CONCILIATION. IT ENCOURAGES PARTIES TO ENGAGE IN INFORMAL

4156

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .