Page 4928 - Week 12 - Tuesday, 25 October 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
which has been put in particularly by the community sector. It is time to get on with it, basically. That is why we think we need to be passing these amendments today.
Again I would point out that they are technical amendments. In terms of the actual operation of the bill, the real details about it, particularly around regulations and all of those sorts of issues, they are not going to have a major bearing. Those are the key issues that we need to be considering today—what is going to happen when the bill is finally implemented, not a technical amendment like today. Again I take Mrs Dunne’s point that we would have preferred they come in a package—and that point was made by scrutiny—but these amendments did actually go to scrutiny at one point. That has to be remembered in this whole discussion that we are having today.
MR HARGREAVES (Brindabella) (5.07): I will not be terribly long. I think the point that Mrs Dunne made around amendments going to the scrutiny of bills committee was well made earlier on today. People have actually acknowledged that and that was worth while. What we do have to understand, though, as Ms Bresnan has just said, and quite rightly—and we can put a bit of context around this—is that we can get on with it, do it right now and look after these kids, or we can fiddle around and worry about a technical amendment which, for example, in relation to clause 34 takes out the words “one month” and inserts “20 days”. We look at clause 40: omit “one month”, substitute “40 days”.
Quite frankly, this bill has to be passed and it has to be passed today. I do not want us to fiddle about for another three weeks, come back in November and have on my head what could happen to some child in that three weeks. I am not wearing it.
Mrs Dunne interjecting—
MR HARGREAVES: I am not interested in the interjections of Mrs Dunne. Mrs Dunne can interject or she can talk to herself or she can talk to my hand. I do not really care which. It has exactly the same effect on me.
We should support the suspension of standing orders because, at the end of the day, we are here to talk about legislation for the vulnerable, the powerless, the people who most depend upon us in this Legislative Assembly. We are not talking about regulations around charges for bicycle licences or anything silly like that. We are talking about kiddies’ lives. I urge everybody in this chamber to support the suspension of standing orders.
Question so resolved in the affirmative, with the concurrence of an absolute majority.
MS BURCH: (Brindabella—Minister for Community Services, Minister for the Arts, Minister for Multicultural Affairs, Minister for Ageing, Minister for Women and Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs) (5.09), by leave: I will continue where I left off, if I may. I move amendments Nos 19, 21, 28, 40, 47, 51, 53, 55 and 57 together as they are minor and technical in nature [see schedule 4 at page 4945].
I will be brief because I spoke earlier today about the range of amendments. I thank the members here for accommodating what has been a slightly confusing set of
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video