Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . . Video

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2010 Week 10 Hansard (Thursday, 23 September 2010) . . Page.. 4438 ..

Detail stage

Bill, by leave, taken as a whole.

MRS DUNNE (Ginninderra) (12.31): I move amendment No 1 circulated in my name [see schedule 1 at page 4491].

As foreshadowed in the in-principle stage, the Canberra Liberals oppose the clauses relating to the Supreme Court Act and the proposed provisions as they relate to judge-alone trials. This is a matter of some complexity and the Canberra Liberals believe that it is contrary to the spirit of the agreement of this Assembly in relation to omnibus legislation. I want to make it clear that if the attorney were prepared to bring this back as a stand-alone bill the Canberra Liberals would be happy to consider it in that context. There is an important matter of principle in relation to whether or not this should have been incorporated into a justice and community safety legislation omnibus bill.

This is a matter which has proved to be quite complex. The fact that there have been significant exchanges between members’ offices and what has now turned out to be about a page and a half of a closely typed description of how these provisions will work indicates that this is not a minor and technical matter and that it should not have been bought forward in an omnibus bill.

I have this morning received feedback from the chief justice that he has no problem with these rules and the change to these rules, which is reassuring, but it is not the principal issue that is of concern to the Canberra Liberals. The principal issue of concern to the Canberra Liberals is that this is not the context in which this matter should have been discussed. It has significant implications for the operation of the Supreme Court and it raises significant questions about the operation of appeals. The fact that the attorney found it quite difficult to address the issues raised by the scrutiny of bills committee demonstrates the complexity of this matter. That is why we oppose the inclusion of these changes to the Supreme Court Act at this time.

Amendment negatived.

Bill, as a whole, agreed to.

Bill agreed to.

Sitting suspended from 12.34 to 2 pm.

Questions without notice

ACTION bus service—management

MR SESELJA: My question is to the Minister for Territory and Municipal Services. I refer to the Auditor-General’s report Delivery of ACTION bus services. The chief executive of your department said this in response to the final draft of the report: “Corporate systems, governance and capability in ACTION have been somewhat compromised over the past three to four years”. What has occurred for corporate

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . . Video