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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 4 Hansard (22 April) . . Page.. 1146 ..

MS CARNELL (Chief Minister and Treasurer) (11.43), in reply: Mr Speaker, I thank members for their support for this piece of legislation which, as Mr Quinlan says, will ensure that payroll tax is payable as appropriate in the ACT.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill agreed to in principle.

Leave granted to dispense with the detail stage.

Bill agreed to.


Debate resumed from 25 March 1999, on motion by Ms Carnell:

That this Bill be agreed to in principle.

MR BERRY (11.44): Mr Speaker, whilst this Bill appears on the surface to be fairly straightforward, there are issues of concern. This morning I was able to talk with the union which covers public servants and they tell me that they have not been contacted by the Government or involved in this in any way. That would come as no surprise to anybody. Here we are a fortnight or so after it was introduced and there has been no consultation whatsoever with the union.

I have contacted the union but we have not been able to sit down and formally analyse the union's position in relation to any of these matters. So, on that ground alone, Mr Speaker, I think there is a strong argument that the Government ought to amend this or to adjourn this with a view to having that consultation. As I said, I have not yet had time to fully consult with the union, although I have had brief discussions with it in respect of the matter, understanding that the Government was to move ahead with it today. I had a briefing in relation to the matter when I learnt that it was going to be brought on this week, and that has been helpful. I would like to thank those officers who made their time available to brief me in relation to the matter.

I will now deal with some of the issues contained in the amendment Bill. Clause 4 of the amendment Bill talks about some amendments to the principal Act in relation to offences against laws in other States and Territories, and the explanatory memorandum sets out in detail what this is intended to achieve. I do not have any particular difficulty with this because it essentially says that an offence against the law of a State or another Territory will be dealt with in much the same way as an offence against an ACT law or a Commonwealth law. It was apparently some sort of oversight in the original drafting of the legislation. I accept that and that would make sense. It is a sensible amendment.

Clause 5 talks about the appointments on probation of training offices and teaching offices. That is straightforward. That is a sensible amendment and it would be supported. Clause 6 is a technical change which would be acceptable because it deals with an error in the principal Act. This corrects the matter.

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