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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 13 Hansard (5 December) . . Page.. 4423 ..

MR BERRY: I thought Mr Moore would have been rising to my defence. This disallowance highlights the total inadequacy of Mrs Carnell's management of her health portfolio. Dozens upon dozens of charges set by determinations of the Health Minister under the Health Act are at risk and invalid. It becomes necessary, therefore, to keep the pressure on the Government to deal with proper processes in this place.

Let us look at the events. First of all, Mrs Carnell issued two determinations, Determinations Nos 106 and 136, to have effect from 1 July 1996. They well and truly revoked all charges before that time. This was identified by the Scrutiny of Bills Committee and questions were raised about the validity of those documents. It later came to pass that it was agreed that those determinations were invalid. Mr Speaker, the next step in the process to deal with any retrospective difficulties which arose from the invalidity of those determinations should have been a Bill in this place and a public debate about retrospective legislation. If Mrs Carnell had had the courage, she would have come in here and said, "There has been an administrative mistake". If she had placed a Bill before this house so that we could have discussed the question of retrospectivity, then the process could have been sorted out. But no. What did she do? She tried to cover it up with another determination which gave retrospective effect to dozens upon dozens of fees and charges.

That retrospective regulation is now being drawn into serious question because of the provisions of the Subordinate Laws Act. The Subordinate Laws Act makes it pretty clear. I will just read into the Hansard the relevant provisions. Section 7 states:

A subordinate law shall not be expressed to take effect from a date before the date of its notification in the Gazette -

that is, a retrospective law -

where, if the law so took effect -

(a) the rights of a person (other than the Territory or a Territory authority) existing at the date of notification would be affected in a manner prejudicial to that person; or

(b) liabilities would be imposed on a person (other than the Territory or Territory authority) in respect of an act or omission before the date of notification;

and where any subordinate law contains a provision in contravention of this subsection, that provision is void and of no effect.

Mr Speaker, there is a lot of conversation going on in the chamber. It would be helpful, Mr Speaker, if you would - - -

MR SPEAKER: I cannot hear it.

MR BERRY: Perhaps if you were standing over here you would be able to.

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