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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 3 Hansard (7 March) . . Page.. 740 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

I have seen the briefing provided by the department of health and, as far as I am concerned, it does not bring any new information to the legal debate over my amendments to the Pharmacy Act. The department's concern seems to be more a difference in opinion about whether there should be any restrictions on companies owning pharmacies. However, I believe that this issue was well and truly resolved in the national competition policy review. I am therefore not convinced of the need to delay the introduction of this legislation, however, I am prepared to give the government the benefit of the doubt and give it a couple more months to clarify its legal status.

I am also prepared to give the government more time to look at this issue because I believe there is a general problem with section 23 of the self-government act. The reference to the ACT not being able to make laws with respect to matters relating to companies is poorly defined, and perhaps does need to be tightened. I understand that the former Attorney-General raised this issue with the federal government towards the end of the last Assembly, and raised the possibility of deleting this part of the act, or of having regulations issued to clarify its intent.

I do not believe that the federal government has provided a response, so I would encourage Mr Stanhope to further pursue this issue over the next couple of months, as a way of removing doubt about the validity of the Pharmacy Act amendments, and any other ACT laws that affect companies.

MR SMYTH (5.19): The opposition was approached by the government yesterday with some concerns about the enactment date of the bill. It is certainly the firm position of the opposition that the intent of the bill be maintained. However, if difficulties arise that may put at risk companies who thought that they were doing the right thing by complying with this legislation, we want to prevent them. With that in mind, we will also be supporting the Pharmacy Amendment Bill 2002, and hope that we can come to a swift resolution so that the intent of the bill, which I think we all agreed to on the day, is carried out.

MR WOOD (Minister for Urban Services and Minister for the Arts) (5.20): Yes, it is not always the best thing to revisit issues in this way but, taking on board the advice that has been given to the Chief Minister and Minister for Health, this is a sensible and modest way of dealing with the issue. Given the support that is coming from the house, we now have the time to examine the detail. Members will be involved in any further discussion, so we can satisfy them thoroughly and, at the appointed time, consider the best means to move forward. I thank members for their support.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill agreed to in principle.

Leave granted to dispense with the detail stage.

Bill agreed to.

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