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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 13 Hansard (5 December) . . Page.. 4430 ..

MS FOLLETT (continuing):

experience and erudition in these matters. This is not the only parliament which Professor Whalan advises. I can certainly let any members know who do not already know that Professor Whalan is held in the greatest esteem nationally amongst all bodies who have anything to do with legislation and delegated legislation. Accordingly, I give Professor Whalan's advice due weight. In fact, Mr Speaker, I have no hesitation in saying that I would probably back Professor Whalan's advice against anyone else's. It was on the basis of his advice that our committee formed the view that the Government's response on these determinations was not adequate. We reported that in our report which was tabled in the Assembly on Tuesday.

In reporting those matters, I actually pointed out to the Government the view of the committee that the response, including the Government's legal advice, was still in contest, that the committee was not satisfied that the action the Government had taken was an effective remedy and that section 7 of the Subordinate Laws Act still posed a considerable problem for the Government in their determination on those fees and charges. In fact, as I said, it appeared that the action that the Government had taken was contrary to section 7 of the Subordinate Laws Act.

My role as the chair of the committee is to report to this Assembly the views and the conclusions of that committee, and that is what I have done. It is not my role as the chair of that committee to take political action. It is not my role as the chair of that committee to comment upon the policy underlying the Government's actions. I comment on the technical, black-letter legal aspects, on advice from an extremely learned and experienced adviser. That is what I have done.

Mr Speaker, it is not my role as the chair of the committee to prevent any member of this chamber from taking other action in relation to a report or a recommendation of the Scrutiny of Bills Committee. It is not my job to restrain people from making political points. I certainly would never want to do that. Indeed, that is a what great deal of our business here is about. Mr Speaker, it is not my role to say that the Government has done the right thing or not. I have reported the committee's view that the matter has not been remedied.

However, I now put aside my chairmanship of the Scrutiny of Bills Committee and speak in support of the action that Mr Berry has taken in moving to disallow this determination. There is no doubt in my mind that Mr Berry has grounds for moving this disallowance motion. It is a fact that the determinations which have been made impose liabilities on the Canberra community which would not have existed had those determinations not been made. I believe that it is up to the Government to remedy this situation. There has been a chapter of errors. I do not blame Mrs Carnell personally for that, but I do blame the health administration. I think it is time they had a sharp lesson in how to do things properly if they want to get legislation or subordinate legislation through this house.

I believe that it is very regrettable that this error has occurred, but I do not believe that it is unreasonable for Mr Berry to go to some lengths to point it out and to require that it be remedied. I also think, given the degree of retrospectivity - it is now some six months, half a year - that it is entirely legitimate that the Government be asked to bring forward legislation to remedy the situation. That, in my view, is the most appropriate remedy.

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