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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 3 Hansard (12 March) . . Page.. 944 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

am very happy that that clause has been included by the Attorney-General-very much at my insistence. Everyone saw the sense in that-to ensure that the 100 or so statements made to date have that protection.

Whilst it is retrospective, given that the inquiry has a limited life span, and given the fact that Mr McLeod called for submissions on that day-and I believe submissions close at the end of the month-it is desirable that the commencement date is the date the call was made, which is 22 February. I think that is eminently sensible.

Incidentally, the government officers have appeared. Mr Quinton, John and Nick, I thanked you for your efforts on this in the in-principle stage. I thank you again, now that you are in the gallery.

It is essential that we have this protection in place, to safeguard all the statements made to date, and all the statements that will be made up to the end of March, and indeed any received after the end of March, if Mr McLeod is mindful of receiving them. In an inquiry like this, I imagine he would do that. That is the basis of this commencement date. It is retrospective, but for very good reason.

MS TUCKER (3.41): I make the general comment that I understand that the intention of this amendment and Mr Stefaniak's bill is to give greater confidence to people in the community about the conduct of the inquiry. The Greens support that absolutely. This amendment and the other amendments appear to me to be sensible, in trying to ensure that, as much as possible, witnesses or members of the community are protected. I think that is a good thing.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 2, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 3 agreed to.

Clause 4.

MR STANHOPE (Chief Minister, Attorney-General, Minister for Community Affairs and Minister for the Environment) (3.42): I move amendment No 2 circulated in my name [see schedule 1 at page 993].

Mr Speaker, the second amendment omits clause 4(1) of the bill and replaces it with subclauses 4(1) and (1A). These subclauses provide for two defences to an action for defamation in relation to the making of statements and giving of documents to the inquiry, and the publication of the report of the inquiry. Subclause (1) provides that, where a matter is published to a person conducting or assisting in the conduct of an inquiry, a full defence to an action for defamation will be made out if it can be proved that the publication was made to that person.

This is a broad defence. It extends to material of a dishonest or sensational nature. For this reason, the defence applies only in relation to a publication to the inquiry. It does not

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