Page 2219 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 16 August 2006

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

---

Question so resolved in the negative.

MR HARGREAVES (Brindabella—Minister for the Territory and Municipal Services, Minister for Housing and Minister for Multicultural Affairs) (11.40): I am disappointed with the antics of the opposition in trying to deny members the opportunity to put on the record in the way they feel they need their views with respect to an issue like the protection of human rights which was, in fact, sparked by the provision of a report from one of their own members. I noticed that the report that we have before us was signed by the chair of the committee. As the chair of the committee was not actually at the conference, I am a little bit mystified as to how the chair of the committee would have any detailed knowledge of the content, which probably explains why he is trying to close down the debate.

Prior to the October 2004 election, I spent two terms on the Standing Committee on Justice and Community Safety, which is now the Standing Committee on Legal Affairs, and the period I served on the scrutiny of bills and subordinate legislation committee is relevant in speaking to this report. I had in those days quite a commitment to the parliamentary process for the protection of human rights. In fact, I actually served as deputy chair to Mr Osborne, whom, I confess, did at least three days work in the 3½ years that he was here. I am sure it was 3½ years, but I could be corrected. I also had the pleasure and privilege of serving with Mr Stefaniak as chair of that committee. It was, in fact, an appropriately formed committee because all of us on that committee had a multipartisan approach to the protection of the rights of people who may be affected by either primary legislation or subordinate legislation.

In looking at this sort of conference I looked into the report to see whether such a committee could be in a position to take the place legitimately of a human rights act. I noticed in the report that Mr Allan Shearan MP from New South Wales asserted that in New South Wales a legislation review committee acts as an alternative to a bill of rights, performing, I suspect, exactly the same sort of role as our committee on bills and subordinate legislation performed.

I do remember the assistant secretary raising with the committee on many occasions how rights had been infringed upon in subordinate legislation and we made the point then that we needed to be vigilant about human rights in the context of legislation that we pass in this place. A bill has to be debated by this chamber, so that all of the provisions within that primary legislation are revealed for everybody to see, and the mere presentation of a bill to this place automatically generates a debate. Such is not the case with subordinate legislation, as the members of the Standing Committee on Legal Affairs will attest to. You have to be vigilant about that. What happens, in fact, is that subordinate legislation is just tabled and, unless the opposition of the day or the government backbench members are vigilant about wanting to see what those regulations and determinations are about, it is quite possible that rights can be infringed.

---

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