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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 3 Hansard (25 March) . . Page.. 818 ..

MS CARNELL (continuing):

a type ordinarily offered by the agent, and those services are provided by persons who normally render those services to the general public; the person engaged to perform the work is an employer in their own right; and the person engaged to perform the work does so for less than eight days in each month.

Mr Speaker, in response to the Victorian Supreme Court decision, both New South Wales and Victoria will provide for employment agent exemptions separate from their service contractor provisions. This reflects more closely the current ACT payroll tax guidelines and the provisions to be included in the Act. The New South Wales and Victorian employment agent regimes provide an exemption for employment agents who contract to exempt bodies such as the Commonwealth. This exemption is not included in existing ACT legislation and is not contemplated because of the significant loss of revenue to the ACT.

In conclusion, Mr Speaker, I wish to point out that the Bill imposes no overall additional regulatory or financial burden on the ACT's employment agents. If this Bill is not introduced, however, the ACT could potentially be exposed to substantial revenue loss. This Bill will address the Victorian Supreme Court decision, provide greater certainty for ACT taxpayers, and will also reduce the cost of compliance to business.

Debate (on motion by Mr Quinlan ) adjourned.

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General, Minister for Justice and Community Safety and Minister Assisting the Treasurer) (11.07): I present the Native Title (Amendment) Bill 1999, together with its explanatory memorandum.

Title read by Clerk.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, I move:

That this Bill be agreed to in principle.

As members will recall, the Commonwealth Parliament last year amended the Commonwealth Native Title Act 1993 after a lengthy Senate debate. I will not go into the details of that debate, which was very widely reported. Nor will I rehearse the arguments for and against the amendments which were eventually passed by the Senate and the House of Representatives. It should be stressed, however, that many of the more controversial elements of those amendments, particularly those concerning the right to negotiate and the use of pastoral lease lands, have little or no direct relevance to the ACT.

The Commonwealth amendments which do have some relevance to the ACT, even if only for the purposes of participating in a nationally consistent scheme, are the new provisions dealing with the validation of certain acts and confirming the effect of various types of acts on native title rights and interests. The Commonwealth confirmation

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