Page 4390 - Week 14 - Wednesday, 30 November 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
is far more likely to be charged with an offence on a bus than an 80-year-old. It was suggested that the best way out was to omit the definition of "pensioner concession card", and that is what this amendment will do.
MR LAMONT (Minister for Urban Services, Minister for Housing and Community Services, Minister for Industrial Relations and Minister for Sport) (4.57): The Government opposes Mr De Domenico's proposed amendment on a number of grounds. First of all, one of the issues that have been confronting government is the question of uniformity of definitions across legislation. What we are attempting to do in relation to the payment of fines, et cetera, is to gain consistency in definitions. Across a succession of Bills that have been presented to this house we have relied upon the definition of the Department of Social Security as to what a pensioner concession should be. In allowing people leniency in paying fines, we need some consistent approach. Consistent across all of our legislation have been the definitions provided by the Department of Social Security with respect to the pensioner concession card arrangements. The pensioner concession card replaced the pensioner health benefits card and the transport concession card and has now incorporated the concessions under those two schemes into one card called the pensioner concession card. It is for that purpose that this definition is contained within the legislation.
I also suggest that there is some social justice principle associated with using this definition and having it included in this Act, as it is similarly included in other Acts. Persons assessed as warranting special consideration for their relative disadvantage become entitled, on meeting the criteria, to a pensioner concession card. Madam Speaker, it is true that we offer a range of other concessions within ACTION. Those concessions, however, are not predicated on a person's ability to pay but, in fact, are predicated on a range of other tests. When we were putting this legislation together, it was deemed to be appropriate that in extending leniency in the payment of fines there should be consistency between this legislation and other legislation and that we should observe the social justice principles that apply in the granting of a card such as this.
The Government will be opposing Mr De Domenico's first, second, third and fifth amendments, for the reasons that I have outlined - firstly, internal consistency with Government legislation already accepted and adopted by this Assembly; and, secondly, the social justice reason for the inclusion of the pensioner concession card as the legitimate test of ability to pay and our social justice obligations. For these reasons, I believe that the Assembly should reject Mr De Domenico's proposition.
MS SZUTY (5.01): Madam Speaker, I have been listening intently to what Mr De Domenico and Mr Lamont have had to say about these amendments. When I first saw them, I thought that Mr De Domenico's amendments made a lot of sense. I do not know that we need to particularly restrict the capacity of people to pay fines in particular circumstances in this way, but I do take Mr Lamont's point that the pensioner concession card has been so described for consistency reasons and for social justice reasons. At this stage I will not be supporting Mr De Domenico's amendments Nos 1, 2, 3 and 5.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .