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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 03 Hansard (Thursday, 11 March 2004) . . Page.. 1118 ..

Clause 79.

MR CORBELL (Minister for Health and Minister for Planning) (5.38): I move amendment No 14 circulated in my name [see schedule 2 at page 1181]. Clause 79 creates an offence in relation to a person pretending to be licensed when not retrospectively licensed in certain circumstances. This amendment removes the imprisonment penalty, with a maximum financial penalty of 50 penalty units remaining.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 79, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 80.

MS DUNDAS (5.39): I seek leave to move amendments No 1 and 2 circulated in my name together.

Leave granted.

MS DUNDAS: I move amendments Nos 1 and 2 circulated in my name together [see schedule 3 at page 1183]. These are quite simple amendments, which change the penalties listed in section 80 from 250 penalty units to 50 penalty units for two strict liability offences. The imposition of 250 penalty units for these offences is clearly erroneous, and there is no other strict liability offence with penalties above 50 penalty units within this whole suite of bills.

In addition, the offences are for advertising without a licence nominee, but further on in the bill we find that there is an offence of building without a licence that provides a penalty of only 50 penalty units. It is quite odd that we are presenting a situation where you can get a penalty of 250 penalty units for advertising without a licence but, when you are actually doing the work without a licence, you only get 50 penalty units.

I think, and I hope, that part of the confusion arose from the fact that the value of a penalty unit is different for individuals than for corporations; for corporations it is five times higher. However, I think the presence of these penalties, along with the custodial sentences that we now are moving, show that greater care needed to be taken in developing this legislation. I hope that the Assembly can see how necessary these amendments are, even though they are quite simple.

MR CORBELL (Minister for Health and Minister for Planning) (5.41): The government will be supporting the amendment of the penalty units from 250 to 50. Following discussions with Ms Dundas’s office, I consider that 50 penalty units is a more appropriate level of penalty, commensurate with the nature of the offence, as provided by clause 80.

MRS DUNNE (5.41): The Liberal opposition will be supporting Ms Dundas’s amendment and commend her again for her eagle-eyedness.

Mr Pratt: That’s “eagle—

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