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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 1 Hansard (28 April) . . Page.. 108 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

Similar references can be found in the Public Sector Management Act 1994 in relation to the appointment of the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly, and in the Financial Management Act 1996 in relation to the budget for the Assembly Secretariat. A formulation along these lines is obviously useful. It forces those who need to refer matters to the Assembly's committees to seek out the committees with the most relevant terms of reference. It is a flexible approach, in other words. However, this formulation has not always been found convenient or suitable.

A number of Acts and one regulation at least refer to an Assembly committee by name. I will mention only one of the references to a committee by name. Section 62B of the Children's Services Act provides that, where the Director of Family Services has directed that a child be transferred from one institution to another, the director is to advise the Standing Committee on Legal Affairs of the particulars of that direction. The committee is to be advised within 14 days of the direction having been given. Having the director provide those particulars to the committee is obviously an important safeguard on the use of powers that affect some of the most vulnerable members of our community. However, if there is not a Standing Committee on Legal Affairs - and there is not at this stage such a committee - then, as matters stand, the safeguard would be lost.

This outcome is something that must be guarded against. One way we could achieve this, of course, would be to leave the Assembly's committee structure untouched for all time. That, of course, is not a particularly good outcome, as the Assembly has just resolved. The Assembly must have the ability to form committees which suit the requirements of the day. That may mean that committees with new names or functions will be created and former committees will be discontinued because they no longer serve the Assembly's needs.

Mr Speaker, our ability to respond to the challenges of the day should not be constrained by references to committees in our laws, and our laws must be framed in a flexible way so that they do not act as an inadvertent brake on the discretion of the Assembly in future to shape its committee system to conform to contemporary needs. This Bill addresses this matter by including in the Interpretation Act 1967 a provision which will allow the Speaker to nominate a committee when there is no committee that answers the description that has been used in a law. If a particular committee referred to in a statute no longer exists, then the Speaker will determine which current committee of the Assembly is the appropriate functional successor of the abolished committee. I am sure members will see the wisdom of this, and I hope they will support this measure. It is a measure which needs to be in place, quite apart from the restructuring of committees of the Assembly which has occurred today. It is a sensible measure to have within our Interpretation Act at any time because there will always be the option for any particular Assembly, over time, to change the nature and the structure of its committees. In those circumstances, it should not be constrained by existing legislation which refers to a particular committee by name.

It is the Government's intention to bring this Bill back for debate on Thursday. I am normally very reluctant indeed to seek legislation's passage in such a short period of time; but, without the passage of the legislation by Thursday, the Assembly runs the risk that certain functions referred to in statute cannot be performed because the reference to committees which no longer exist cannot occur. For example, I understand that certain

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