Page 5278 - Week 12 - Thursday, 28 October 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I feel it is justified to put these two amendments—the one that I move now and the one that I will move in a moment—forward for reconsideration. It is clear that the discussion on this section demonstrates that in its current drafting it creates the potential for a licence applicant who is independent of the previous performance of the premises to be disadvantaged because of the previous performance. This would be most unfortunate and an undesirable outcome. Therefore I commend the amendment circulated in my name.
MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Attorney-General, Minister for the Environment, Climate Change and Water, Minister for Energy and Minister for Police and Emergency Services) (12.28): The government will not be supporting this amendment. The practical effect of this amendment is extremely detrimental to the ability of the commissioner to deem premises suitable to supply liquor.
Section 78 sets out a list of matters to assist in the commissioner’s consideration of whether premises are suitable for a liquor licence or permit. Section 78(a) relates to past convictions or findings of guilt under the Liquor Act involving the premises, irrespective of who the person might have been.
Past convictions involving the premises should not be limited to particular individuals. Why, Mr Assistant Speaker? Because the information in section 78(a) is designed to capture problems associated with the premises which may have caused a person to be convicted of an offence under the Liquor Act or subject to occupational disciplinary action by the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal. The emphasis here is on resolving issues of problems inherent in the actual premises which may have caused a person not to comply with the act.
The commissioner needs to know about any previous problems with the premises which may have led to a criminal conviction or finding of guilt, yet continue to be unresolved. For example, where problems with inferior design of the premises left insufficient space for proper storage of product or waste that led to fire exits being blocked, causing a safety issue for the public, then, because the emphasis in section 78(a) is on resolving issues with the premises, the identity of the person convicted is immaterial. The section needs to capture any person so that past problems with the actual premises can be addressed and resolved before the commissioner issues, renews or amends a liquor licence or permit.
The Assembly should note that in the case of a transfer of a licence, to facilitate commercial expediencies the decision whether or not to transfer to a new licence fee would not be based on prior convictions against the act involving the premises. I refer the Assembly to clause 31 of the act, where there is no requirement for the commissioner to consider the suitability of premises criteria in deciding an application for a transfer. This assessment would occur, however, when the licence next comes up for renewal.
If passed, Mrs Dunne’s amendment will impact negatively on the integrity of the licensing scheme. The government cannot support it.
Question put:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video