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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 07 Hansard (Thursday, 1 July 2004) . . Page.. 3130 ..

the committee that there is a need to do a lot more work to understand what we are doing in this field—the capacity for healing of individuals who are victims and the impact on this capacity as to how we respond as a society.

Debate (on motion by Mr Stanhope) adjourned to the next sitting.

Standing Committee on Legal Affairs

Statement by member

MR STEFANIAK (12.23): I seek leave to make a brief statement.

Leave granted.

MR STEFANIAK: I wish to note a few things on the Gungahlin Drive Extension Authorisation Amendment Bill 2004. Firstly, the Standing Committee on Legal Affairs has not had a chance to formally meet. I have been provided with a form of words by Peter Bayne, the legal adviser to the Standing Committee on Legal Affairs performing the duties of a scrutiny of bills and subordinate legislation committee. He is happy for me just to read out the form of words he has given us. He has had a look at this matter.

Peter Bayne advises that the declaration by a minister under the new GDE bill might have the effect of authorising an aspect of the territory plan in relation to what is a reserved area, but as far as he can see the territory plan is a piece of subordinate law which, in itself, is not an act. The plan is made under an act. What this means is that a subordinate instrument under the GDE bill would be changing another subordinate law and that has not usually been seen as raising any problems under the committee’s terms of reference. It is not a Henry VIII clause, as is generally understood. Peter Bayne also mentioned that he had spent 20 minutes on the phone with the Planning and Land Authority, but could not get a response, and that he carried out his research over the net. I seek leave to table the document.

Leave granted.

MS TUCKER (12.25): I seek leave to make a short statement.

Leave granted.

MS TUCKER: I want to make just a brief comment on the process and the capacity of the Scrutiny of Bills Committee to look at this matter. Mr Stefaniak has read out comments from Peter Bayne, the legal adviser. We have not had a committee meeting or an opportunity to engage in discussion with the legal adviser about this comment. It is certainly not a report of the Scrutiny of Bills Committee. I think it is particularly ironic that, on the first day of the Human Rights Act being enacted, we now see this piece of legislation being pushed through without any capacity for the Scrutiny of Bills Committee to make a comment. I am looking forward to seeing the Attorney-General’s statement when we debate this matter later today.

Sitting suspended from 12.26 to 2.30 pm.

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