Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 9 Hansard (2 September) . . Page.. 2720 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

of placing the reference to the fee in the same section as the reference to the application for review to which the fee applies - but to add to the proposed section 96A in clause 8 a new subsection containing the conventional words which attract the operation of disallowability. That is my fourth amendment.

Mr Speaker, my concern is not just about this occupational health and safety legislation, but about a growing tendency, particularly coming from this Minister's office. I must be fair and say that my criticism actually applies to his predecessor who tabled this legislation. I realise that there is an overlap there. Nevertheless, I think it is very important that we look at a good constitutional and legal principle. That is why I will be raising concerns with reference to the Motor Traffic Bill (No. 2), which removes the access to the Magistrates Court to challenge administrative decisions on special licences; to the use of minimum sentences, in the Motor Traffic (Alcohol and Drugs) Bill, undermining the proper sentencing role of the court; and, in the Motor Traffic (Alcohol and Drugs) Bill (No. 2), to an intrusion into personal autonomy in the compulsory blood sampling proposals.

Mr Speaker, I think there is also a role for the Attorney-General here to look at the legislation and to ensure that this recent trend in legislation is not followed up. I think it is very important that we deal with this now, so that we do not slip into some of the most appalling pieces of legislation that have come into Australian law in other jurisdictions, where people have no ability to appeal before courts - the "three strikes and you are in" sort of legislation. I know that it has not been proposed here, but that is the direction that I draw attention to.

Mr Kaine: Might I refer you to the question of relevance, Mr Speaker.

MR SPEAKER: Yes.

MR MOORE: I take the point, Mr Speaker. In this particular place, I have a number of concerns about the occupational health and safety process. I have foreshadowed those amendments, and I have certainly discussed them with Mr Kaine, who has already said that he is quite comfortable about accepting some of them. I think the others will be able to be debated.

MR KAINE (Minister for Urban Services and Minister for Industrial Relations) (11.11), in reply: Mr Speaker, I was most interested in what Mr Moore had to say. Of course, much of it, I warn members, has no relevance at all to this Bill. That is a debate that will take place later in the week, hopefully. I think it is worth while reviewing what these amendments are all about. What we are attempting to do here is to incorporate into the Occupational Health and Safety Act provisions that currently exist in two outdated, obsolete Acts. One is the Machinery Act 1949 and the other is the Scaffolding and Lifts Act 1957. Both of those Acts were good Acts when they were introduced way back in antiquity, but they have become obsolete and unrelated to today's workplace. So, we are attempting to incorporate the essential provisions from those Acts into the Occupational Health and Safety Act, and that will allow us then to repeal those two old, obsolete Acts.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .