Page 2351 - Week 06 - Thursday, 10 May 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Once again, this amendment addresses matters raised by the scrutiny committee in relation to statutory requirements imposed on other parliaments in moving and debating a motion to end the appointment of the Clerk. The point was made that introducing a requirement to provide notice of a motion of this kind would serve two purposes: first, the Clerk would be in a position to seek a legal remedy in advance of the debate having occurred and a resolution having been passed; and, second, MLAs would have sufficient opportunity to inform themselves on the matters raised in the motion and to give them due consideration.
I accept the wisdom of this approach, and the amendment, I think, addresses the matters raised by the committee. On advice and on reflection, I am attracted to seven calendar days rather than the six sitting days, as provided for by our commonwealth counterparts, on the basis that it would obviate the need for a large number of special sittings to be brought on in the event that the Assembly wished to debate the matter during a period when the Assembly was not sitting, such as the traditional holiday period between December and February.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 16, as amended, agreed to.
Clauses 17 to 19, by leave, taken together and agreed to.
Clause 20.
MS HUNTER (Ginninderra—Parliamentary Leader, ACT Greens) (12.32): I move amendment No 3 circulated in my name [see schedule 1 at page 2466].
This amendment proposes to omit clause 20, the regulation-making power. It is inconsistent with all the important principles that I discussed during the in-principle stage. The importance of the bill lies in clearly separating the legislature from the executive to the greatest extent possible in a Westminster parliament. To then delegate a regulation-making power to the executive over the office of the parliament is not consistent with that principle.
It is very unlikely that the power would be used, and, whilst that can be used as an argument for both sides, the fact that it is unnecessary should not be seen as a reason not to worry about the important principle. This is the legislature and, should there be an issue that needs to be resolved, as the legislature we should be able to resolve it. It should be our sole responsibility to collectively keep our house in order rather than delegating that responsibility to one particular group within the Assembly.
MS GALLAGHER (Molonglo—Chief Minister, Minister for Health and Minister for Territory and Municipal Services) (12.34): The government will not be supporting this amendment. We recognise the contribution from Ms Hunter and the principles of separation of powers underpinning the removal of the regulation power from this bill. But we are concerned that this proposed amendment may leave us in the circumstances of needing to recall the Assembly in the event of an unforeseen
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video