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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 11 Hansard (26 September) . . Page.. 3342 ..

Detail stage

Clauses 1 to 4, by leave, taken together and agreed to.

Clause 5.

MS DUNDAS (4.36): I seek leave to move together amendments Nos 1, 2 and 3 circulated in my name.

Leave granted.

MS DUNDAS: I move amendments Nos 1, 2, and 3 circulated in my name [see schedule 1 at page 3369].

These amendments are minor amendments. They are to cover the good samaritan who protects a person from injury or at risk of injury. An obvious example is where a good samaritan pulls a person out of the way of a speeding vehicle and in the process causes a minor personal injury. I am sure that we all had this type of good samaritan in mind originally, but perhaps our good intentions were lost in the drafting process.

These amendments, like many other amendments that are made with the support of the Assembly, are an example of the importance of having a collaborative approach in this Assembly and the need to have all bills scrutinised not only by the opposition but also by the crossbench parties. This is not about grandstanding or causing the government grief. It is merely about providing practical solutions within the legislative process.

MS TUCKER (4.37): As I mentioned in the in-principle debate, it is arguable whether people really are at risk of damages claims for leaping in when help is needed. On the other hand, we will wait to see whether there is a greater likelihood of someone enthusiastically and carelessly, although not recklessly or dishonestly, causing damage. At this stage, it is neither six of one nor half a dozen of the other. However, given the common fear that a more litigious society may give rise to instances of people suffering enormously for their generosity, it is probably wise to make this move. The Greens will be supporting Ms Dundas' amendments as they will ensure that people who leap in to assist others who are at risk, say, of being run over will be protected by this legislation.

MR STEFANIAK (4.38): The opposition also will be supporting the three amendments proposed by Ms Dundas. She has made a cogent case in terms of why they are needed. I think that public policy will be well served by having these three amendments, so we will be supporting them.

Amendments agreed to.

Clause 5, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 6.

MS TUCKER (4.39): I move amendment No 1 circulated in my name [see schedule 2 at page 3371].

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