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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 13 Hansard (5 December) . . Page.. 4436 ..

MR WHITECROSS (Leader of the Opposition) (11.27): Mr Speaker, I had not originally intended to speak in this debate because it seemed to me that the issue was reasonably clear and the process was reasonably clear; but I have been forced to my feet by some of the remarks made, particularly those made by members on the Government side and Mr Moore. Mr Speaker, what Mr Berry has undertaken today is a completely appropriate procedure. On Tuesday, into this Assembly came a report raising very serious concerns about the validity of some determinations made about fees. That report contained information that fees determined earlier in the year and to have effect from 1 July were in fact invalid, that the Government had been collecting fees illegally from July to October at the very least, and that, on the face of it, it would appear that the determination that attempted to fix up that error may itself have been illegal because it contains a provision which is retrospective and, according to section 7 of the Subordinate Laws Act, a provision with retrospective effect is void and of no effect.

Mrs Carnell: That is not true. That is not what it says.

MR WHITECROSS: Void and of no effect.

Mrs Carnell: It does not say that.

MR WHITECROSS: Mrs Carnell, you go and read it. That is what it says. Mr Speaker, this is a very serious matter. Professor Whalan may have chosen to couch his remarks in the moderate language of a legal adviser, but the seriousness of the issues he raises cannot be denied. At the end of the day I do not really care what individual members of this place think about the Government Solicitor's advice or about Professor Whalan's advice. The fact is that a real question, a significant question, exists over the validity of these determinations. The only way we are going to resolve this, if we do not take up the advice of Mr Berry to the Government and introduce retrospective legislation, is when someone goes to court and contests the fees. Then it will be too late. We can avoid the uncertainty. We can avoid the need for a process of litigation through the courts about this by the Government admitting that there is a potential problem and fixing it.

Mrs Carnell: Why did Mr Berry not bring forward a motion asking us to legislate?

MR WHITECROSS: Mr Berry, quite appropriately, put on the notice paper a motion saying that we, for our part, are concerned that this - - -

Mrs Carnell: That is not what it says. It just disallows.

MR WHITECROSS: Mr Speaker, do you ever call the Chief Minister to order?

MR SPEAKER: Yes.

MR WHITECROSS: Try now.

MR SPEAKER: She is not talking. You have the floor.

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