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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 14 Hansard (9 December) . . Page.. 4761 ..

Clause 4

MR MOORE (4.41): I move:

Page 2, line 22, definition of "negotiation", omit "meeting attended", substitute "process undertaken".

Mr Speaker, as members have indicated that they will be supporting the amendments, I do not see any point in going through each one in detail.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment (by Mr Moore) agreed to:

Page 2, line 24, definition of "negotiation", after "telecommunications", insert "but does not include communications between officials which do not involve a Minister".

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 5

MRS CARNELL (Chief Minister) (4.41): I move:

Page 2, line 26, omit the clause, substitute the following clause:

"Application

5. (1) Part 2 of this Act does not apply in relation to -

(a) negotiations for agreements of the kind specified in the Schedule; and

(b) negotiations of a kind specified by instrument by the Minister.

(2) An instrument under paragraph (1)(b) is a disallowable instrument for the purposes of section 10 of the Subordinate Laws Act 1989.".

Mr Speaker, this amendment, hopefully, will be seen as a sensible one. It avoids the need for an overly-prescriptive approach to the Schedule, rather than attempting to look into a crystal ball and foresee all circumstances in which it would be appropriate to exempt agreements from the operation of this Bill. This straightforward amendment provides a mechanism to deal with these issues as they arise. This amendment is not an attempt by the Government to circumvent the operation of the legislation. As members can see, any instrument prepared by a Minister will be subject to scrutiny by the Assembly. The amendment strikes a balance in putting in place a mechanism to deal with the unforeseen.

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