Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2018 Week 13 Hansard (29 November) . . Page.. 5172 ..
The annual report clauses also imply that meeting the circumstances exonerates individuals. I think it would be better to leave the determination of exoneration to courts or other bodies that find someone guilty or innocent, and, as such, going back to reputational repair protocols, as per the first committee report, would be a good way to proceed.
MR BARR (Kurrajong—Chief Minister, Treasurer, Minister for Social Inclusion and Equality, Minister for Tourism and Special Events and Minister for Trade, Industry and Investment) (8.26): Similarly, my comments relate to amendments Nos 47 and 48. It is clear that proposed section 204 does not intend to exonerate someone in the terms that Mr Coe has outlined. It does not overturn the commission's finding. The section requires the commission to make guidelines that prescribe how the commission is to comment on the findings of subsequent investigations, disciplinary or prosecutorial action. On that basis the government is happy to agree with the retitling of this section to "reputational repair protocols".
MR RATTENBURY (Kurrajong) (8.27): I think Mr Coe has articulated the issue around this very well, and we are happy to support both of these amendments.
Amendment agreed to.
MR COE (Yerrabi—Leader of the Opposition) (8.27): I move amendment No 48 circulated in my name [see schedule 1 at page 5204].
Amendment agreed to.
MR COE (Yerrabi—Leader of the Opposition) (8.27): I move amendment No 49 circulated in my name [see schedule 1 at page 5204]. This simply replaces 1(b) of clause 204 with a new clause that states: "the person has subsequently been cleared of any wrongdoing (whether by a court or otherwise)". It is a little bit broader and, in effect, provides a catch-all rather than the more limited version that is in the bill at present.
MR BARR (Kurrajong—Chief Minister, Treasurer, Minister for Social Inclusion and Equality, Minister for Tourism and Special Events and Minister for Trade, Industry and Investment) (8.28): This is quite a late and new iteration of a proposed amendment. It is certainly unclear to my office why this version was submitted at such a late stage. We are perhaps not of a mind to support it tonight, but it could form part of a consolidated bill next year if, upon more reflection and after more time, people considered it worthy. The advice I have at the moment is not to support it at this stage.
MR RATTENBURY (Kurrajong (8.29): We received this amendment quite late in the process which, of itself, is fine, but we have not had time to consider the implications of this, test it and think it through. We are not going to support this one this evening, either. Similarly to Mr Barr, we are happy to have a look at it later on. Each of these areas contains detailed questions. These are not unfair questions that Mr Coe is raising, but on this one we have simply not had the time to think this one through and consider what it may or may not mean.