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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 11 Hansard (21 October) . . Page.. 3494 ..


MR SPEAKER: Is it the wish of the Assembly to debate this order of the day concurrently with order of the day No. 3, Executive business, Children and Young People (Consequential Amendments) Bill 1999? There being no objection, that course will be followed. I remind members that in debating order of the day No. 2 they may also address their remarks to order of the day No. 3, Executive business, Children and Young People (Consequential Amendments) Bill 1999.

MS TUCKER (5.11): I seek leave to withdraw amendment No. 2 on the green sheet and move my amendment on the pink sheet.

Leave granted.

MS TUCKER: I move:

That the following new clause be inserted in the Bill: Page 106, line 28:

"241A Review

(1) The Minister must review and evaluate the first 12 months of operation (the review period ) of this Act in relation to therapeutic protection, to determine whether therapeutic protection is being provided in appropriate cases and appropriate ways and to evaluate the effectiveness of therapeutic protection orders.

(2) The terms of reference for the review are to be as agreed between the Minister and the Legislative Assembly Standing Committee whose functions include examination of matters related to the care and protection of children and young people in need.

(3) The Minister must present a report of the review to the Legislative Assembly not later than the first sitting day after a 3 month consideration period commencing on the first day after the end of the review period.

This redrafted amendment requires the Minister to review the first 12 months of operation of the Children and Young People Act specifically in relation to therapeutic protection orders. The broad purpose of this review is to evaluate this section of the Act to determine whether therapeutic protection is being provided in appropriate cases and appropriate ways. In deference to the Minister, I have removed from my amendment the parts which specified the terms of reference of this review, and thus we have a revised amendment. Instead, I have specified that the terms of reference for the review are to be agreed between the Minister and the appropriate Legislative Assembly standing committee.

While I have removed the terms of reference in deference to the Minister, although I understand he is not going to support my amendment anyway, I have been advised that it is highly unlikely that the objections the Minister raised are valid - that is, that this section of the Act would have been subject to scrutiny by any court. The only likely instance when it may be subject to some form of scrutiny is if the public official, in this case the Minister, responsible for ensuring the review is undertaken does not undertake


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