Page 3364 - Week 12 - Tuesday, 17 September 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
ASSOCIATIONS INCORPORATION BILL 1991
Detail Stage
Consideration resumed from 11 September 1991.
Clause 1
MR CONNOLLY (Attorney-General, Minister for Housing and Community Services and Minister for Urban Services) (3.45): On the last day this matter was before the Assembly I moved the adjournment - which is why I now have the call - on the basis that Mr Collaery had circulated certain amendments and then later he undertook to do some further work on them. I have seen the amendments in their current form. They are acceptable to the Government and, indeed, make a constructive contribution to the Bill. So, I foreshadow that we will be supportive of that.
I propose that we take the clauses up to clause 72 in one hit so that Mr Collaery can then move his amendments. Is that an appropriate procedure to suggest?
MR COLLAERY (3.46): I may have an amendment to clause 64, depending upon the Scrutiny of Bills Committee report, which I am just checking. So, could we do clauses 1 to 63 together?
Clauses 1 to 63, by leave, taken together, and agreed to.
Clause 64
MR COLLAERY (3.46): Clause 64 creates a strict liability offence in the event that a public association, through any misadventure or any reason whatsoever, leaves an unintended hiatus in the position of public officer. In more simple language, that means that, where a voluntary association's public officer dies, departs or resigns and the rest of the committee members are off on holiday and do not fill the position within 14 days of that death, departure or resignation, they are strictly liable; they are deemed to have committed an offence, punishable by a conviction and a fine not exceeding $200.
Offences of strict liability should be very rare indeed in modern legislation. I must concede that this one got past me, as Attorney. It came to my notice only when Professor Whalan drew attention to it at the Scrutiny of Bills Committee stage. I believe that we are indebted to Professor Whalan. The Scrutiny of Bills Committee reported on this matter to the current Attorney, Mr Connolly, and his response to the committee was that he did not propose to change the provision, due to the importance, as I think he put it, of the enjoiner on associations to provide a public officer at all times.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .