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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 10 Hansard (24 September) . . Page.. 3194 ..

Bill as a whole

Debate resumed from 25 June 1997.

MR SPEAKER: The question is: That Mr Humphries's amendments Nos 1, 2 and 3 be agreed to.

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General) (11.15): Mr Speaker, members will recall that when the Bill was debated on the last occasion these amendments were moved by the Government. They broadened the scope of the Bill very substantially, to include a large number of other matters essentially of a health and community care services-related nature. They provided for the correction of earlier errors committed by governments of various persuasions and tidied up a large number of matters that were subject to earlier government decisions, in relation to the determining and levying of fees.

The Scrutiny of Bills Committee has examined these amendments in the period subsequent to the introduction of the amendments and has indicated, I believe, that it saw no reason to oppose these amendments. Obviously, from time to time the Scrutiny of Bills Committee does point out whether determinations of fees have a deficiency of one sort or another, and the approach that the Government takes in these matters is that these sorts of matters should be determined in that way by the Scrutiny of Bills Committee. It has done so on this occasion. The process of correcting legislation and regulations from time to time is not a new process at all. Occasionally, there is the need for action of that kind, which can be revealed independently of the committee's deliberations. I recall that in the life of the previous Government there were occasions when action along the lines of the Government amendments was considered necessary. For example, the Financial Institutions Duty (Validation) Bill 1994 addressed a deficiency in a determination that was not unlike matters dealt with in the Government amendments before the house today.

Mr Speaker, I have circulated an explanatory memorandum for the amendments, which members have had for some time. In fact, they have had since June to look at it. It explains the purpose of each of these amendments. Certainly, it addresses some problems, including, for example, the Motor Traffic Act regulations, dating back to 1994 and introduced by the former Government, as well as some problems with parking charges and the road rescue fee which was levied in last year's budget. I think it is important that we comprehensively tidy up these matters, and I believe it is appropriate to deal with them in this way. I repeat the thrust of comments in earlier debates that these matters can be subject either to legislation or to other corrective action. It was seen as appropriate by Mr Berry to do this by legislation; so be it. Let us deal with them all in that way, in that case. For that reason, these amendments have been moved.

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