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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 6 Hansard (14 May) . . Page.. 1531 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

I recall that, when Mr Humphries and I were ministers, the previous government, almost as a matter of course, would ensure that draft bills were circulated to the relevant bodies. I can recall, in cabinet, seeing checklists as to where a bill had been sent. It was always sent to the DPP, and usually to the Legal Aid Office. I recall bills, on occasions, having been sent to the Bar Association or the Law Society.

Whilst there are some simple machinery bills and mechanical bills where that may not be necessary, or indeed possible, and some bills of urgency where that quite clearly is impossible, I think it is a practice that should be followed, wherever possible. This bill, which had some fairly substantial bits of legislation in it, ideally should have been sent to the relevant agencies for comment. I think that would help in ensuring we get better legislation.

I pass that on to the government. I think it is a good practice to adopt. It is obviously something you will not be able to do in all instances. With anything such as this, which is going to make a major change, it ensures that the draft is circulated to relevant agencies and bodies, such as the Law Society and the Bar Association, for comment. The government may not agree with the responses made by those associations. I can recall that, on a number of occasions, I did not agree, and neither did my predecessor. At least it gives them a chance to have their say and can also assist greatly in making legislation better. So I commend that to the government.

I do not know what Mr Stanhope's time frame is in relation to that. I assume he mentioned a number of months, which would be most appropriate. Almost certainly, from what he is saying, he will be bringing in more legislation later this year. At least everyone will have a chance to have a say, to have input into it, and I thank him for that.

The opposition is happy to support the amendment moved by the government.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 19, as amended, agreed to.

Clauses 20 and 21, by leave, taken together and agreed to.

Clause 22.

MR STANHOPE (Chief Minister, Attorney-General, Minister for Health, Minister for Community Affairs and Minister for Women) (11.16): Mr Speaker, this is the second part of the proposal that I spoke to earlier. The Assembly has just agreed to remove the proposed new chapter 14 and reinsert the provisions that currently apply in the ACT-namely sections 11A and 11B of the Interpretation Act. This tidies up the result. It ensures that we return to the status quo-that the provisions of sections 11A and 11B continue to apply.

MR SPEAKER: Could you formally move that amendment please, Mr Stanhope?

MR STANHOPE: I was on the wrong amendment, Mr Speaker; I beg your pardon. This is a simple technical amendment. It is amendment No 2 on the white paper, not the purple paper-clause 22-and I formally move that [see schedule 2 at page 1593].

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