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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 14 Hansard (9 December) . . Page.. 4762 ..

MRS CARNELL (continuing):

We could all spend our time today guessing what needs to go into the Schedule to deal with the complexities of intergovernmental negotiations that have not even been thought of yet. All of us know that situations may arise that warrant exemption. All we can do is agree to the amendment to clause 5. Mr Speaker, this provision may not be used often. Who knows how often? I certainly do not. But, as legislators, it would be remiss of us if we did not provide a standard legislative mechanism to deal with this issue of exemptions. Of course, this instrument has to come before the Assembly for scrutiny. It is my understanding that it will be disallowable.

MR MOORE (4.43): Mr Speaker, I will be opposing this amendment. I must say that it is not something over which I would die with my legs in the air, because there is no doubt that it would still be a disallowable instrument and, therefore, the Assembly would have the final say. It seems to me, though, that, in cases where this action is required to add something to the Schedule, there really ought to be a proactive measure coming before the Assembly to the effect that this is a long-term exemption and, therefore, the Assembly ought to be able to consider it. That would require an amendment to the Act. It is just a slightly different approach. I understand what Mrs Carnell is trying to achieve, but I think it is better that this amendment be opposed and that there be a proactive stance in bringing legislation to the Assembly in order to change the Schedule.

MR WHITECROSS (4.44): Mr Speaker, the Opposition will be opposing Mrs Carnell's amendment. It seeks to provide an opportunity for blanket exemptions from the provisions of the Act. It seems to me that there are already provisions there which deal with things that come up urgently. If things do not come up urgently, then it is possible for the legislature to deal with them in another way. Really, the proposition underlying the amendment is entirely hypothetical - that something might come up which we want to exempt from the provisions of the legislation. The Government have not presented any sort of persuasive argument as to what those things might be.

Amendment negatived.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 6

Amendments (by Mr Moore, by leave) agreed to:

Page 3, line 5, after "shall", insert ", subject to section 10".

Page 3, line 5, after "7 days", insert "(or, if that is not possible, as many days as is possible)".

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

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