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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 7 Hansard (2 July) . . Page.. 2105 ..

MR BERRY (continuing):

Therefore, in my view, the Board should continue to consider applications for registration under section 57(4) when they are lodged after 15 December 1995. However, if a person does apply for registration after 15 December 1995 then this would be a relevant factor for the Board to consider in deciding whether to exercise its discretion under section 57(4) to register that person.

Now, I go back to an advice which you have, which is dated 30 March 1998 - there is an earlier advice than that, I think, which goes back to 1995 or 1996 - which again raises the issue of why is it so urgent today when it was not urgent before. I note from that advice - I do not know whether this person is still an applicant, but this was in relation to a person, a person X - that there was a decision of 2 November 1995 not to register a person. I do not know the circumstances of person X. I would not have a clue. I do not want to. The Labor Party does not want to take over the role of the board, but we certainly do not want to subvert the role of the board either by retrospective legislation. The politics of this are whether you want to make sure that the rights of individuals are preserved or you do not. I am going to err on the side of safety, and we are going to err on the side of safety - - -

Ms Carnell: Safety for whom, the community?

MR BERRY: Safety for the people involved, the community.

Ms Carnell: It is not the community.

MR BERRY: No, the applicants are members of the community as well, Mrs Carnell. Applicants do not automatically throw out their right to be treated as members of the community merely as a consequence of being an applicant, for heaven's sake. All we ask is that Mr Moore or his officials talk to Mr Stanhope and his office and clarify the issue. We would be quite happy to deal with it a little bit later on today if everybody can be satisfied that everything is okay. Given the scrutiny of Bills committee report this morning, these advisings which we received this morning and have not had time to consider properly, and some of the things that have been said here, I think it is just fair to take a step back and let this rest until a later time this day. I indicate that we will be moving to adjourn it.

MS CARNELL (Chief Minister and Treasurer): Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I think I already sought leave to speak a second time.

MR SPEAKER: Yes. I will ask for retrospective leave for Mr Berry as he spoke again. That seems to be a popular phrase these days.

MS CARNELL: Mr Speaker, I will make a couple of points. One is that the "legal right that is being removed", and I put that in inverted commas, is a right which you would have to say on policy grounds simply is not appropriate for people to have. I will give you a good example of that. Mr Moore has taught for many years in schools and has acted as a school counsellor. Mr Moore could apply right now, under this, to be a registered psychologist. So could Mr Wood. Mr Wood similarly, after many years of teaching, could, under this current deal, apply right now to be a psychologist.

Mr Quinlan: Stop it. You are scaring the kids.

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