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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 13 Hansard (19 November) . . Page.. 3719 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

cooperatives had an annual turnover of less than $1 million during 1998-99 and only 4 per cent of the cooperatives had an annual turnover more than $10 million.

Around 35 per cent of the cooperatives in New South Wales are culture and recreation cooperatives, such as clubs and ski lodges, and over 20 per cent are providing human services, such as housing, aged care and child-care services. Consumer cooperatives constitute about 10 per cent of the sector, while primary producer cooperatives form another 12 per cent of the sector. This distribution of numbers does not reflect the distribution of turnover. Primary producer cooperatives generate 85 per cent of all turnover of the sector. New South Wales is home to 38.9 per cent of all the cooperatives in Australia.

Clearly, the issues in calling a meeting to wind up are very different for a dairy cooperative, to use a familiar example, and a group of maybe 10 people who can be contacted by phone in one day, so the registrar may waive the requirement for a small cooperative to go through with the complicated notification requirements as the winding up procedures would totally or substantially deplete the remaining assets of a failed, very small cooperative, which could be seen as contrary to the principles of cooperatives.

Of course, because there are no guidelines, it is open to the registrar to waive for many reasons, but the legislation is structured so that clauses 7 and 8 are overarching guides to every decision made under the legislation. The requirement is that any decision must advance the principles of cooperatives as listed at clause 8. As I have said, notification will greatly improve that, opening the decisions to some scrutiny. I am also happy to see the power to charge corporations. Holding bodies to account is essential.

The scrutiny report also raised concerns about clause 11 (4), but I am satisfied with the response given in a briefing, which was basically that this power is limited by the clause as a whole and by clauses 7 and 8. The purpose is to allow the registrar to adapt parts of the Corporations Law, basically by substituting "registrar" for "Australian Securities and Investment Commission", as needed.

I will speak to Ms Dundas' amendment later. I just want to make a quick comment on the process. We did not get the government's response to the report of the scrutiny of bills committee early enough and we need to remind the government that they did say that they would be much more respectful of the role of the scrutiny of bills committee than the previous government. I am hoping to see greater regard being given to the work of the scrutiny of bills committee and that we will not see the government trying to push legislation through before we have had time to have a really good look at it, before members have had time to look at reports of the scrutiny of bills committee and the government's response thereto.

MR STANHOPE (Chief Minister, Attorney-General, Minister for Health, Minister for Community Affairs and Minister for Women) (12.25), in reply: Mr Speaker, I thank members for their comments and generally for their support. I acknowledge the comments that have been made about the scrutiny of bills committee's report. I have to say that I have not sought an explanation about the delay. I regret that and it is our intention to provide timely responses to scrutiny reports. I do not know why this one took the length of time it did. I will look into that. Of course, it is an issue on which we do seek to keep on top.

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