Page 2909 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 14 August 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
commonwealth in consultation with all states and territories. They require the agreement of all states and territories. The NDIS supports for participants rules 2013 are not the subject of the court matter, as far as I am aware. The subject of the court matter relates to a decision by the NDIA, the National Disability Insurance Agency, in relation to what are reasonable and necessary supports for an individual participant in an individual case.
Paragraph 3(b) relates to any attempt by the commonwealth to propose a change to the national disability insurance (supports for participants) rules 2013, which is what the commonwealth would be doing if it were to act on this matter, and the ACT’s position in relation to any such rule change.
MADAM SPEAKER: Mr Rattenbury, on the point of order.
Mr Rattenbury: In considering this, Madam Speaker, I point you to continuing resolution 10. It is not a numbered paragraph; it just sort of hangs there, but it states:
… where a ministerial decision is in question, or in the opinion of the Speaker a case concerns issues of national importance such as the economy, public order or the essential services, reference to the issues or the case may be made in motions, debates or questions.
I think this points to an explicit expectation by the Assembly that even if a court case is going on, matters of national policy may still be debated. I think that Ms Stephen-Smith has just alluded to this in her comments. Under your direction, members have been careful not to seek to express particular opinions on the case. But I think it is fair, as the motion speaks to, that we discuss the policy questions behind it and not be constrained by the court case. That is what I think standing orders speak to in that paragraph.
Mrs Dunne: On the point of order, Madam Speaker—
MADAM SPEAKER: Can I get to you in a moment, Mrs Dunne? I want to confer with the Clerk. Mrs Dunne on the point of order.
Mrs Dunne: On the point of order, I also draw your attention to the final dot point in the previous paragraph 10.19 of the companion. It talks about the principles we need to consider when we are talking about sub judice. It is the principle of comity. It is stated:
… that the legislature and the judiciary should, as far as is possible, avoid intruding in each other’s areas of responsibility.
Further, in paragraph 10.92 it is stated:
… evidence received by the House of Commons Procedure Committee suggested that the principle of comity was as important as the risk of prejudice.
Madam Speaker, I think that Mr Wall has offered a suggestion. It is not actually about the policy issues that Mr Rattenbury spoke about but about how we frame that. There
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video