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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 13 Hansard (27 November) . . Page.. 4903 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

in the late 60s and 70s. However, the legislation relating to the institute is redundant, so out it goes.

An item of some note is new section 75A, which clarifies exactly what "retrospective commencement"means and ensures that this can only occur under the authority of an act. I think that is a very sensible and somewhat significant provision.

The other noteworthy thing the bill does-and I would ask the Chief Minister to address this-is validate the actions of the Building and Construction Industry Training Levy Board for the period 1 November 2002 to 18 July 2003. I just want to know what happened there, why this has to be validated, why it was not validated initially and also the implications for the period 1 November 2002 to 18 July 2003. I appreciate that the appointment of some people needed to be validated, and that occurred on 19 July. But I think it is important for the Assembly to know what else occurred that needs to be validated.

I would like to make one further point. I think Parliamentary Counsel or the people who gave them instructions might have got ahead of themselves. The second last page of the bill, page 161, refers to the repeal of redundant or obsolete legislation and registrable instruments that are no longer needed. Reference is also made to division 4.4.3, Legislative Assembly (Members' Staff) Act, disallowable instruments, terms and conditions of employment of staff, et cetera. This has been made redundant and I have been advised that that is a little bit premature.

But apart from those points, Mr Deputy Speaker, there is nothing else that appears controversial in this bill. The opposition will be supporting it.

MS DUNDAS (9.53) The ACT Democrats will also, as with prior statute law amendment bills, be supporting this piece of legislation. I would like to take the opportunity to congratulate the Office of Parliamentary Counsel. I am continually impressed by the volume and quality of the legislation they prepare. Little slip-ups like the error in schedule 3 of the Public Sector Management Act, where the word "employers"was substituted for "employees", almost never happen despite the urgent timelines that drafters are forced to work to. So I commend all the drafters for preparing elegant legislation that is as clear and simple to understand as is possible. I commend them for always maintaining grace under pressure at times when amendments and revised amendments are flowing back and forth.

Despite dealing with so many drafting requests from ministers and other members of the Assembly, many of which are quite substantial, Parliamentary Counsel also find time to update and modernise our statute book. Reading legislation will probably never be the easiest way for ACT residents to find out what their rights and obligations are but I commend the efforts to make legislation as simple and as well-structured as possible. Although most of our statute book has been created by our own Assembly, we still have many acts that were incorporated from the Commonwealth and New South Wales, and the antiquated Public Institution Act of 1880, governing religious teaching in public schools, is one example that comes to mind.

So the process to update our statute book and eliminate antiquated acts and provisions is ongoing. The removal of the redundant reference to New South Wales legislation in the

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