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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 14 Hansard (12 December) . . Page.. 4924 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

Page 34, line 30, proposed section 274C, omit "Minister by instrument", substitute "Remuneration Tribunal under subsection 10(1) of the Remuneration Tribunal Act 1995".

The amendments are just about a better explanation in the Act of the role of the statutory appointments legislation as it applies to this, and also a clear explanation of the commissioner's salary being decided by the Remuneration Tribunal.

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General and Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning) (11.53): Mr Speaker, it was always the intention that the commissioner's remuneration be determined by the Remuneration Tribunal. That probably would have occurred even without this amendment No. 25; but we accept it anyway for surfeit of caution.

Mr Speaker, as to amendment No. 24, I would be very surprised if any government ever tried to appoint a Commissioner for Land and Planning without very extensive consultation. In fact, I would argue that consultation on an issue like that needs to be more extensive than that provided for by the Statutory Appointments Act. If Mr Moore, for example, were not on the Planning and Environment Committee of the Assembly, I would not dare to appoint the commissioner without consulting him anyway.

Ms McRae: Even if he were not in the Assembly, you would still consult him.

MR HUMPHRIES: Even if he were not in the Assembly, I would have to consult Mr Moore. Even if he were dead, I would have to get a ouija board out and consult him.

Mr Moore: In fact, by the skills you have been showing lately, Gary, perhaps we ought to have a little discussion about the position after all.

MR HUMPHRIES: That is right. Perhaps you do not want statutory appointments in those circumstances at all, Mr Speaker. We support both of these amendments.

MS McRAE (11.54): Mr Speaker, we are supporting these amendments. We have no problem in supporting them. I assume that the amendments that Mr Humphries will put in later this evening are just amendments that have to be made further along the line to ensure that it is all within the Act. Is that correct?

Mr Moore: Yes; it is consequential.

MS McRAE: They are consequential on this one that you have circulated, are they?

Mr Moore: Yes.

MS McRAE: Thank you. I just needed to have that point clarified.

Amendments agreed to.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

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