Page 4283 - Week 14 - Tuesday, 29 November 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
give more powers to a public health officer to go into a restaurant and check whether the ravioli is off than we would be prepared to give, say, to a tax inspector to check the books or to someone else. So, there is a level of consistency here, we would say, in what the Government is doing. But, again, we will respond to all of Mrs Carnell's detailed questions.
My office has spoken to some members of the acupuncturist profession who were a bit concerned that this could be a backdoor method of putting the profession out of business; that we might develop a code that was unworkable; that the Government or the Minister may be the mouthpiece of the AMA, which has some animosity towards the alternative health professions. While the working party is meeting tomorrow, that in no way is the final meeting of the working party. Indeed, that working party will probably be in place for many months to come, as codes of practice are developed and a lot of detailed implementation work is done. Nevertheless, the concerns of some members of the profession are important and, in discussion with Mrs Carnell earlier, I suggested that perhaps the best course was to debate the Bill in principle this evening and adjourn the detail stage. Now that Mrs Carnell has given an indication that she is minded to move some quite specific amendments, I think that is an even more desirable course of action.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill agreed to in principle.
Detail Stage
Clause 1
Debate (on motion by Mrs Carnell) adjourned.
INTOXICATED PERSONS (CARE AND PROTECTION) BILL 1994
[COGNATE BILL:
INTOXICATED PERSONS (CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS) BILL 1994]
Debate resumed from 10 November 1994, on motion by Mr Connolly:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
MADAM SPEAKER: Is it the wish of the Assembly to debate this order of the day concurrently with the Intoxicated Persons (Consequential Amendments) Bill 1994? There being no objection, that course will be followed. I remind members that in debating order of the day No. 6 they may also address their remarks to order of the day No. 7.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .