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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 1 Hansard (15 February) . . Page.. 22 ..

MR STANHOPE (continuing):

The scheme allows the Minister to set fees by way of disallowable instrument. It allows, for example, remissions and deferrals of payment and the recovery of fees paid by a party for whom judgment is made and it provides for review of decisions on fees.

The Bill places the standard fee structure in the Magistrates Court Act and deletes the sections on fees from other Acts. The legislation affected by the restructuring relates to the Magistrates Court, the Supreme Court, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, residential tenancies, the Tenancy Tribunal and consumer credit. The scheme also introduces fees in relation to the Discrimination Act. A second component of the Bill will allow a juror to disclose jury deliberations to his or her lawyer in inquiries about contempt of court or disclosure of jury deliberations or a juror's identity. The Bill also removes the requirement that a Full Bench of the Supreme Court hear appeals against AAT decisions made by a tribunal including a presidential member or a member who is a judge.

Other components of the Bill amend the Government Solicitor Act and the Coroners Act. In fact, section 5(3) of the Government Solicitor Act, which remains unchanged, allows the Minister to request the Government Solicitor to act for any other person or body. This Bill extends the range of persons for whom the ACT Government Solicitor may act with or without the request of the Minister. The Bill permits, for example, the ACT Government Solicitor to act on behalf of Totalcare or an employee or ex-employee or a director or ex-director without the Minister having to make a request. However, new section 5(3A) requires the chief solicitor to decide whether the Territory has an interest in the outcome of the matter. As I have said, section 5(3) has no limitation provided the Minister requests that an entity be represented. These amendments do not extend the range of entities that can be represented by the Government. Rather, they have the effect of removing responsibility from the Minister. The amendments to the Coroners Act remove responsibility from the Minister in a like sense.

I really do not know whether there is anything more that I need to say in relation to this omnibus Bill, Mr Speaker. As I indicated, the Opposition is prepared to accept the amendments. The legislation, as mentioned in a brief flurry of comment on this matter last year, was introduced shortly before the coroner's report on the implosion and the coincidence did raise some comment at the time. I said then that the principle of the amendments to the Coroners Act seemed reasonable but that it seemed inappropriate to be debating them at the time. The Labor Party is now quite happy to support this package of Bills, Mr Speaker.

MR HUMPHRIES (Treasurer, Attorney-General and Minister for Justice and Community Safety) (12.02), in reply: I thank the Opposition for their support for the Bill. As Mr Stanhope has indicated, it is largely a Bill comprised of a series of technical and procedural amendments to legislation in the justice portfolio to ensure that the legislation meets the needs of the community. I do not propose to go over the comments that Mr Stanhope has made on amendments to the Juries Act and other legislation. I agree with what he had to say about that.

I do want to make one brief reference to the amendments to the Coroners Act. I maintain the view, based on a number of representations to me as Attorney-General seeking my intervention to reopen coronial inquiries, that it is inappropriate for the power to reopen

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