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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 2 Hansard (29 February) . . Page.. 322 ..


Amendment agreed to.

MS TUCKER (10.50): I move amendment No. 2 circulated in my name which reads as follows:

Page 3, line 12, paragraph (b), omit "or conduct", substitute ", or conduct at a facility mentioned in paragraph (a),".

This amendment is to clarify the functions of the corporation. At present, paragraph 5(b) setting out the functions in the Bill would give the corporation the power to organise or conduct sporting, cultural, entertainment or commercial events anywhere. This would be giving the corporation carte blanche to undertake virtually any activity where it thinks it can make a buck. Given the pressures the corporation will probably be under to make a profit, this could lead to some risk taking and speculative ventures which I do not think the Government should be getting involved in. We should heed the bad experiences of such ventures as Harcourt Hill, CanDeliver, the Hotel School and even the experience of Bruce Stadium till now and go very easily about entering into new commercial ventures. My amendment therefore makes it clear that the corporation can only conduct sporting, entertainment and other events at facilities that it manages, and not just anywhere.

MS CARNELL (Chief Minister) (10.51): Mr Speaker, this amendment proposes that sporting or entertainment facilities managed by the corporation be prescribed under regulations. There are no provisions for regulations under this Bill. While there is no objection to public notification of the facilities, it may be more immediate if the normal reporting mechanisms were to be used to advise the Assembly rather than regulations which would be more onerous to update. As I say, there is no capacity or no provision for regulations under this Bill. Mr Speaker, this is simply unnecessary.

Question put:

That the amendment (Ms Tucker's ) be agreed to.

The Assembly voted -

AYES, 9    	NOES, 8

Mr Berry  	Ms Carnell
Mr Corbell  	Mr Cornwell
Mr Hargreaves  	Mr Hird
Mr Kaine   	Mr Humphries
Mr Osborne  	Mr Moore
Mr Quinlan  	Mr Rugendyke
Mr Stanhope  	Mr Smyth
Ms Tucker  	Mr Stefaniak
Mr Wood  
Question so resolved in the affirmative.


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