Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2007 Week 12 Hansard (Tuesday, 20 November 2007) . . Page.. 3546 ..
MR MULCAHY (Molonglo) (11.08): Mr Speaker, I wish to make a statement pursuant to standing order 47. The Hansard will show that during my speech I made it very clear that the Liberal Party are opposed to tax avoidance measures. I did not say that we supported them. I simply indicated that Treasury had advised that there had been no instances of tax avoidance, even though this bill was brought in, and that it was a hypothetical scenario. I also indicated that we were supporting the legislation, and I think the Chief Minister has significantly misrepresented the statements that I have made to the Assembly.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill agreed to in principle.
Leave granted to dispense with the detail stage.
Bill agreed to.
Statute Law Amendment Bill 2007 (No 2)
Debate resumed from 27 September 2007, on motion by Mr Corbell:
That this bill be agreed to in principle.
MR STEFANIAK (Ginninderra—Leader of the Opposition) (11.10): I think probably it would be almost impossible for the attorney to misrepresent what I have got to say in relation to this, although you never know. This bill must be about the 25th in a long line of statute amendment bills to make minor, non-controversial changes to legislation—things picked up by parliamentary counsel or proposed by them; picked up by government departments; technical amendments; also repeals of redundant legislation. Basically this bill does all of that in a thoroughly—I was going to say “pedestrian way”—efficient way because it is non-controversial.
I see the parliamentary counsel up there—Mr Dalton and his colleagues. The only things the attorney highlights, in fact, are specifically non-controversial; they are merely examples of where legislation is superseded by other pieces of legislation. He specifically mentions the Environment Protection Act; schedule 1 contains five amendments to that. The first two are meeting a redundant provision. The last three are also redundant and there are some further omissions because of another act picking up what that act actually did. So there is absolutely nothing controversial here and of course the opposition will be supporting these sensible amendments to our legislation.
DR FOSKEY (Molonglo) (11.11): The explanatory statement to this bill states that the amendments are minor or technical, non-controversial and for law revision purposes only. My reading of the bill makes me confident that I can take the government at its word on this matter. The amendments update, simplify or clarify the meaning of the laws they affect. Again I congratulate the Office of Parliamentary Counsel for its excellent work in identifying and rectifying the language used in so