Page 1612 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 1 April 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
their residential address. It might just be highly embarrassing and stressful for some people if they had to explain the highly personal reasons why their details should be kept secret.
In drafting these amendments we considered whether it should be left to the registrar-general’s discretion as to whether he or she accepted that there were valid reasons for keeping a residential address secret. This decision could be appealable to the Civil and Administrative Tribunal. We asked the Attorney-General’s office to tell us whether there were any good policy reasons why we should go down this route, but we have heard no compelling arguments why the registrar should have this discretion.
There is enough time between today and when this bill will be brought on for debate in another sitting period for the government and the community to consider these amendments, raise issues and suggest amendments if they think they are necessary. I would welcome any feedback on these amendments and hope that we can work together in the Assembly to finetune them if necessary prior to their hopefully eventual passage.
The situation is radically different under a balance of power Assembly, and I think it is incumbent on us to make a real effort to find ways to cooperate and work collaboratively on developing legislation that is fair and as effective as possible. I say that simply to truly invite feedback, and if there are concerns with these provisions or if people feel that there is a better way to do it we are open to those suggestions.
Another issue which I am still undecided on is whether a record should be kept of everyone who has accessed even the publicly available sections of the overall records. This may discourage possible mischief and accords with good record keeping practice for government-held personal information in general. Again, I welcome any feedback. I should mention that the feedback I have received from numerous community groups has thus far been positive.
The registrar-general will still be able to demand the residential addresses of committee members if he or she feels that it is necessary in order to undertake proper supervision of the incorporation system. We are not attempting to restrict the registrar-general in the performance of his or her duties.
Apparently the registrar-general has been quite understanding regarding this issue and has been willing to keep a person’s contact details secret if they are convinced that there is a reasonable need to do so. This is commendable. However, this alternative is not well known and certainly came as a surprise to many of the constituents with whom my office has been liaising in the formulation of this legislation.
Another issue which remains unclear is whether, despite his goodwill, the registrar-general is actually empowered to keep the information secret, given that section 11 of the statute under which he operates specifies that the information must be made available on request. This legislation will rectify any lack of legislative authority and remove any possibility for confusion or dispute.
Another change that I am trying to give effect to with this legislation is to allow people to provide alternative forms of contact detail. I have not heard any good
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .