Page 711 - Week 03 - Thursday, 22 March 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
associate the Tribunal with an existing administrative structure. The Commission accordingly recommends that the proposed Tribunal be established using the facilities of the Magistrates Court. The Tribunal should be located in the existing Family and Children's Court building. Its Registry and other administrative infra-structure should be run by the Magistrates Court staff with additional resources to accommodate the extra work generated by the Tribunal.
At some future time Mr Wood might wish to clarify that what he meant was that we do not want this important role to go to a court. I suspect, again, that there is a slight ideological slant there, given the unhappy experiences of much of the Labor Party in the court system.
I should also point out that the role of a public advocate in this area also intersects with that of other advocates that we are developing in the modern society. As well, as the house will hear this afternoon, the Alliance Government is well advanced in its Cabinet deliberations on the establishment of machinery in antidiscrimination, privacy and other areas.
Also, as I have alluded to twice, my Law Office and I, together with all the relevant parties at this stage - and I stress at this stage - are looking at a proposed new court structure for the ACT. Indeed, this role may well fit those reforms, but I suggest to Mr Wood that he think carefully about commencing any campaign to prevent this important role being used and developed out of any new court-tribunal structures that we are developing and that we do not undermine the standing of any advocate by suggesting that that advocate is too close to a court.
It is the sincere wish of the Alliance to gain bipartisan support on a new, innovative court model for the ACT. These recommendations will interact very well with proposed structures that the Alliance Government wishes to put shortly to the ACT people, both in the area of court reform and in the area of profound developments in the human rights and antidiscrimination areas.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
ASBESTOS REMOVAL PROGRAM
Ministerial Statement and Paper
Debate resumed from 20 February 1990, on motion by Mr Duby:
That the Assembly takes note of the paper.
MRS GRASSBY (11.38): Let me say at the outset that the Opposition is pleased to see that the asbestos removal
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .