Page 152 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 23 February 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I have one reservation about the operation of the Bill. It means that we, as an Assembly, as elected members, will have to pay more attention to and be more careful about the content of subordinate laws. I am not suggesting that we have been cavalier about subordinate laws when they have been placed before the Assembly in the past, but I think it is true to say that we tend to treat them as a package. We accept it or reject it, and perhaps in the past we have overlooked things about which we have minor misgivings on the basis that we have no power generally to reshape what is in that package of subordinate laws. With the passage of this legislation, that no longer will be the case. We will have to pay a considerable degree of attention to what is put forward in this Assembly and laid on the table by way of subordinate laws if we are going to make sure that we do our job properly, and that means some more work. The old fine toothcomb will be working overtime. My fine toothcomb has almost lost its teeth. I have had 24 Bills to deal with in the last couple of months, and I can assure you that dealing with legislation in detail is a very time consuming exercise. I think there will be more of that going on with the passage of this Bill.
Mr Moore did say in his presentation speech that Mr Connolly had been responsible for the disallowance procedure which is before the Assembly at the moment. I think Mr Connolly corrected the record by pointing out that he was responsible for only that part which dealt with uncalled on motions rather than the whole procedure of disallowance.
Mr Connolly: The reversing of the onus was the key.
MR HUMPHRIES: That has been made clear. There is one final comment I would make. Mr Connolly has complimented the Opposition - I want to repeat it so that it goes into the Hansard twice - for supporting many of the measures which come before the Assembly to do with the efficient operation of the Assembly and of government. I would put that down, Mr Deputy Speaker, to the fact that the ACT Liberal Party has more experience of government than all but two divisions of the Liberal Party in Australia - that is, the Tasmanian and New South Wales divisions - at least in the last four years.
Mr Connolly: We thought it had to do with the expectation of length of time in opposition.
MR HUMPHRIES: I will not note that interjection. Perhaps, Mr Deputy Speaker, we find that exposure to both opposition and government gives one a better balance in viewing matters of this kind. One realises that one could end up - I hope that Mr Connolly realises this - on the opposition benches at any point in time without much notice of that, and then measures like this are extremely important to your existence. I commend the Bill.
MS SZUTY (11.23): Members will recall that my colleague Mr Moore introduced this Bill during the December sittings of the Assembly in 1993 - not so long ago - and it is pleasing to see a private members Bill returned for discussion and debate very quickly. I think the reason for that is that it is generally recognised as a very useful and commendable measure for the Assembly to adopt. As Mr Connolly and Mr Humphries have said, the principle behind the legislation is very simple and straightforward. If passed, it will enable members not only to disallow subordinate legislation but also to amend it - a very sensible provision indeed.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .