Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 8 Hansard (29 August) . . Page.. 2565 ..
MR MOORE (continuing):
those protections are still in there and will apply in this case. I thank you and the other members who have indicated support for this legislation.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill agreed to in principle.
Leave granted to dispense with the detail stage.
Bill agreed to.
That this bill be agreed to in principle.
MR STANHOPE (Leader of the Opposition) (4.18): This bill has quite a genesis. In a press release dated 16 February 1999, the Attorney-General said that the ACT government would be taking security at Olympic events seriously, with legislation being introduced during the first half of 1999 to give police powers to deal with illegal crowd behaviour at Olympic soccer matches to be held in Canberra in September 2000.
I have to say that it is of concern that, whilst the bill was introduced on 25 March, 1999, as promised by the Attorney, it has been ignored until today, until it is almost too late to carry out the necessary administrative tasks to implement the legislation. I think it is of some concern, too, that the Attorney has effectively ignored the criticism of the legislation by the scrutiny of bills committee for, in the words of that committee, its draconian approach.
For this legislation to be implemented, it must be gazetted, and then the legislation empowers the minister to declare a sporting or other event that is part of or associated with the Sydney 2000 Olympics or the Paralympic Games to be an Olympic event. The minister must be satisfied that a declaration is reasonable and necessary for the safety of persons attending the event and for the avoidance of disruptions to the event. Notice of the making of any declaration must be published in a daily ACT newspaper and the Gazette at least seven days before the date of the event affected, but failure to publish the notice in the newspaper does not invalidate the declaration.
We really are beginning to run very close to the bone here. For instance, if the bill is passed today, it and the declarations must be gazetted before 6 September, as the first event is to be held on 13 September. Given that Mr Humphries, regrettably, has not answered letters that I wrote to him on this matter on 13 March and 9 August, one does worry whether this timetable will be met. I think the Attorney is making a mockery of the implication of the initial media statement that people will be given sufficient notice of what they can and cannot take into the venues, of what the prohibited items will be. I think that it is of real concern at this stage, as we are debating this legislation, that we do not know what the prohibited items are that might be contained in the declaration.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .