Page 1052 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 20 March 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
apply an offence provision, it seems to us to be the logical place in the Interpretation Act to place a penalty unit provision.
As I said at the outset, this is but a very little Bill; but the minor change that it makes by way of lines in the statute book belies its importance and its contribution to the desirable goal of keeping the criminal law up to date. It would be a major task for this Assembly or any parliament in any State of Australia, or, indeed, the Commonwealth Parliament, to be able to constantly monitor the range of penalties found throughout the laws in force in a Territory or State. No State parliament has ever been able to say that it has achieved that, because you simply cannot be looking, on an annual basis, at every Act and updating the penalties. We have seen repeated examples in this place already, in our short history, of penalties that clearly have no relevance to the conduct that has been deemed to be criminal. It is quite easy to see in some of these Acts that have been rarely amended that the penalty presently in force is merely the decimal currency equivalent of an old penalty expressed in pounds. The adoption of a penalty unit procedure in the criminal law provides the opportunity over time to ensure that the criminal law in this Territory remains relevant.
As is always the case when the Opposition introduces private members' business, we do so in a cooperative spirit, as Mr Berry said when introducing the important provision he has just put forward. He would welcome comment from the Government and, as I have said repeatedly when I have done so, that offer stands. We would be happy to discuss this with the Government and accept any amendments or suggestions that they have. I commend this concept to the Government. It puts in a concrete form a suggestion that we have repeatedly made and, as is abundantly clear from the volume of this Act, it is not a terribly hard procedure to achieve. It requires but a straightforward and simple amendment to the Interpretation Act. I commend the Bill to the house.
Debate (on motion by Mr Collaery) adjourned.
SUBORDINATE LAWS (AMENDMENT) BILL 1991
Debate resumed from 13 February 1991, on motion by Mr Connolly:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
MR CONNOLLY (10.58): Mr Speaker, I move:
That pursuant to standing order 152, order of the day No. 1, private members' business, be discharged.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .