Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 13 Hansard (9 December) . . Page.. 4281 ..
MR HUMPHRIES (Treasurer, Attorney-General and Minister for Justice and Community Safety) (3.20 am): Again, this amendment would increase the cost of the scheme. It would increase, in effect, the maximum amount that might be payable in respect of a criminal injury to a total of $80,000 where someone other than the primary victim is responsible for that victim's maintenance. In theory, it would be nice to do so, but again it sends the scheme in the wrong direction and increases costs in a way which is simply not sustainable by this community.
MR QUINLAN (3.21 am): If a criminal act is perpetrated on a person, quite often it is not only that person who suffers for a considerable time. A primary carer may have considerable inhibitions placed on their lives, possibly on their earning capacities and on their general freedoms. It seems to me that not many cases would fall into this class. To completely shut out the primary carer of someone who has been severely incapacitated to the point of needing that primary carer seems to me to be niggardly in the extreme.
Amendment negatived.
MR STANHOPE (Leader of the Opposition) (3.22 am): Mr Speaker, I ask for leave to move my amendment No. 4.
Leave granted.
MR STANHOPE: I move:
Page 11, line 30, proposed new subsection 16(2), omit the subsection, substitute the following subsection:
" '(2) A related victim applying for financial assistance in relation to the death of a primary victim must serve a copy of the application on each other person whom the applicant believes to be another related victim in relation to the deceased primary victim.'.".
This amendment mirrors amendment No. 2, which the Government very graciously agreed to support. I look for similar support here.
Amendment agreed to.
MR STANHOPE (Leader of the Opposition) (3.23 am): Mr Speaker, I ask for leave to move amendment No. 5.
Leave granted.
MR STANHOPE: I move:
Page 12, line 17, proposed new paragraph 18(2)(b), omit "such proportion of $30,000 as the court thinks fit, such that the total amount of special assistance awarded is $30,000", substitute "such amount as the court thinks fit, such that the total amount of special assistance awarded does not exceed $30,000".
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .