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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 13 Hansard (25 November) . . Page.. 4562 ..

Clause 4.

MS TUCKER (10.56): I move amendment No 1 circulated in my name [see schedule 1 at page 4628].

As I have already explained, this amendment ensures that if government does not make public the report of an inquiry under the royal commission or board of inquiry acts within a month of the board or commission reporting to the government, the Chief Minister must make a statement to the Assembly explaining that decision.

MR STANHOPE (Chief Minister, Attorney-General, Minister for Environment and Minister for Community Affairs) (10.57): Mr Speaker, the government is happy to accept that amendment and we will support it.

MR SMYTH (Leader of the Opposition) (10.57): Mr Speaker, it is a reasonable amendment and keeps control on the government and brings accountability back to the Assembly. So the opposition will be supporting the amendment.

MS DUNDAS (10.58): Just briefly, as I said earlier, the ACT Democrats will not be opposing this amendment. I understand that it will go some way in making the executive report to the Assembly about how inquiries have progressed. But I don't think it goes far enough in making this legislation as a whole worth supporting.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 4, as amended, agreed to.

Clauses 5 and 6, by leave, taken together and agreed to.

Clause 7.

MR STANHOPE (Chief Minister, Attorney-General, Minister for Environment and Minister for Community Affairs) (10.59): I seek leave to move amendments 1 to 3 circulated in my name together.

Leave granted.

MR STANHOPE: I move amendments 1 to 3 circulated in my name together [see schedule 2 at page 4628].

Mr Speaker, the amendment bill, as I mentioned just a moment ago, was considered by the Standing Committee on Legal Affairs, the scrutiny of bills committee, which reported in September, having considered proposed subsection 38 (4) to provide a very wide immunity which was not adequately explained in the statement.

On further consideration, the government has agreed with the committee's view, reassessed the need for the provision and included proposed new subsections 38 (1), 38 (2) and 38 (3) to provide a sufficient and a more appropriate balance of immunity protection under the Civil Law (Wrongs) Act 2002.

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