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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 5 Hansard (9 May) . . Page.. 1401 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

This is really technical. However, the explanatory memorandum really doesn't explain why this well known term of art has been ditched. It's a significant enough departure as to allow relevant interested parties to closely examine the provision to ensure that it will work in practice.

This is a very technical bill. It's as dry as dust

Yet it changes the way courts, tribunals, and practitioners will approach the construction of the law.

In particular, it does extinguish some common law rules which changes some protections the common law offers citizens ...

Moreover, this is a rare sort of Bill-it is the roadmap by which Courts construe all pieces of legislation.

... it is incumbent on the Assembly to consult with specialists to ensure that the Bill can work in practice, and gets the balance right between the powers of the Assembly and the rights of Canberrans.

When I spoke to Mr Harris last night, he was keen for the Legal Affairs Committee to look at this piece of legislation.

We are going to agree to this bill in principle today, and a member of the government will adjourn the debate until next Thursday. I indicate that the opposition will move to refer it to a committee. (Extension of time granted.) I think Significant concern has been expressed by experienced practitioners, and this is a potentially significant change in the way all of our laws are interpreted. The scrutiny report is a very powerful document, backed up by the opinions expressed to me by two members of the profession, including the president of the Bar Association. There are other items that both members of the profession I have spoken to so far about this bill want to submit on.

I am mindful that the government and the bureaucrats are keen to pass the bill, but it is important that something so fundamental that affects the rights of Canberra citizens in such a big way as the interpretation of our legislation be done properly and that relevant practitioners who are going to have to work with this be able to have their say as well any other interested people in the community. When we briefly talked about this in the scrutiny committee, Ms Tucker indicated that another group might be interested in having a say.

It is important that we get this right. Accordingly, I will be proposing that we refer this bill to the Standing Committee on Legal Affairs for inquiry and report by 20 August. We have our hands full till 27 June. August 20 will be the first sitting day back in the new sittings. That will give the government a chance to pass the legislation in the August sittings. That is not unreasonable, given the complexity of this legislation and the very serious concerns expressed to date about part of it.

We need to get this right. Proposed section 142 would impose significant changes upon our system. There are some very worrying aspects to that proposed section. I think it is important you get it right and give people who are going to be affected, members of the legal profession who are going to have to advise clients and appear in court in relation to

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