Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 1 Hansard (18 February) . . Page.. 282 ..
MR OSBORNE (continuing):
your good self, Mr Speaker, and Mr Stanhope some time in the next week or so, after which we will perhaps be able to come back to the Assembly with some more information on that very important issue.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Report on Children's Services (Amendment) Bill 1998
Debate resumed from 10 December 1998, on motion by Mr Osborne:
That the report be noted.
MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General, Minister for Justice and Community Safety and Minister Assisting the Treasurer) (10.40): Mr Speaker, the reasons for this matter being on the notice paper today, I think, were well discussed yesterday. It is obvious to any observer that there is very little point in having a debate about a Bill which has just been passed in the last 24 hours by the Assembly. This was to have been a continuing debate about the report of the Justice and Community Safety Committee on the Children's Services (Amendment) Bill 1998. Mr Speaker, there seems to be not much point in debating a Bill which has already been passed. If members have nothing better to do, of course, I am very happy to have an inconsequential debate about anything; but I think that we have all got better things to be doing than debating matters which are no longer relevant to the Assembly.
Mr Speaker, the Government will not be producing a response to the report. It seems to me to be a complete waste of the time of the Public Service to ask them to prepare a response to a Bill which has already been considered by the Assembly. That government response was due next month, and members have seen fit to not bother to wait for the government response. I have a feeling that this issue will be revisited in some form or another in the future.
Mr Speaker, on the point of the Children's Services (Amendment) Bill, however, I would like to advise the Assembly that I have received advice from my department about the effect of amendments which were passed yesterday in the Assembly. I will table this advice, but I would like just to read verbatim what it says:
The nub of the problem with the Osborne amendments is that he has repealed the provision which formerly provided for the jurisdiction of the Court. This provision was required for the operation of a number of other provisions (section 21 - age, section 22 - procedure, section 25 - joint charges). His bill makes no allowance for the consequential amendment of any of these provisions to refer to the new jurisdiction vesting provision.
Possible consequentials which might be desirable as a result of changes to the Children's Services Act