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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 07 Hansard (Thursday, 1 July 2004) . . Page.. 3190 ..

The scrutiny of bills committee was concerned that this clause contained insufficient definition of administrative powers, inappropriate delegation of legislative powers and insufficient subjection of an exercise of legislative power to the necessary parliamentary scrutiny. Whilst it is appropriate for the law to apply equally to all citizens, it was always intended to allow a broad discretion in respect of the dispensation of the operation of the bill in favour of a particular person or group of people. Any decision to suspend the application of the provisions of the bill was required only in situations where the public interest was served by doing so. This is an important qualification that safeguards against any arbitrary application of the power provided under clause 130.

The scrutiny of bills committee, in its report on the bill, suggested that consideration should be given to issuing guidelines as to how this power would be exercised and whether these guidelines needed also be subject to parliamentary scrutiny, that is, made a disallowable instrument. In view of the need for transparency in decision making, the government has agreed to amend the provision to allow for guidelines to be issued specifying in more detail how the power in clause 130 will work.

The remaining amendments relate to minor drafting changes that will assist in making the provisions of the bill more user friendly. Amendments are proposed for clauses 58, 59 and 115 to make reference to self-incrimination and client legal provision at sections 170 and 171 of the Legislation Act. That will assist the practitioners in their understanding of the provisions and the possible protections available to them.

An amendment is being proposed to the regulation-making power to provide for the exercise of the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in respect of elections conducted under this act, including when a decision of the Supreme Court is final and conclusive, and how the validity of an election may be challenged. Likewise, an amendment has been proposed to provide for a regulation-making power to enable the imposition of penalties of not more than 30 penalty units for offences against the regulations. That is necessary to accommodate certain offences that are likely to be prescribed under the regulations.

Two further amendments are proposed to the transitional provisions at clauses 151 and 152. The first amendment allows for regulations in respect of savings or transitional matters to be made for not only the Health Professionals Bill but also for other legislation referred to in the Health Professionals Legislation Amendment Bill. The second amendment allows for regulations to be made to allow for modifications in respect of savings or transitional matters to be made for not only the Health Professionals Bill but also in respect of the operation of other territory laws.

Members will appreciate when we come to the actual amendments that we have facilitated their passage by explaining all this at the moment. I believe that Ms Tucker intends to move a number of amendments—three, I think—and they will be supported by the government. Make the most of it now, Ms Tucker. Later in the night the position may not be the same. Firstly, in relation to clause 22, which is concerned with how regulations may regulate professions, I understand that her amendments relate to ensuring that consultation occurs with an entity representing the particular profession before a regulation is made. In relation to clause 78, Ms Tucker proposes an amendment that encourages and protects health professionals who make reports about other professionals.

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