Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 4 Hansard (30 March) . . Page.. 1132 ..
MR BERRY (continuing):
years, I think, is your use-by date in any job". Chief Minister, having been in the job for five years and having subjected us to all of these disasters, is it not about time you took this first piece of frank and fearless advice from Mr Tonkin?
MR SPEAKER: I rule the question out of order. It is clearly asking for an expression of opinion.
MR OSBORNE: How long has Mr Berry been here? My question is to Mr Humphries, the Attorney-General. Minister, I have noticed with interest the media reports today in relation the Federal Parliament's inquiry into reproductive technology. I have also been made aware of the Queensland Premier's issuing of a discussion paper on the very subject in the last couple of days. I then went back to find a press release from you dated 5 January 1999, well over 12 months ago, announcing that the ACT Law Reform Commission was about to undertake a major review of our laws on reproductive technology. Could you tell me where that inquiry is currently at and when you hope to table its report? While you are answering that question, can you tell me how many full-time staff members the ACT Law Reform Commission has?
MR HUMPHRIES: I thank Mr Osborne for that question. The Law Reform Commission has no full-time dedicated staff members. All the people who work for the commission are members of the commission who are paid an honorarium but work at other jobs at the same time. The secretariat to the commission is provided by my department. That is the case for a large number of other government advisory bodies - probably all of them. It is appropriate that that be the case, because the cost of free-standing support mechanisms would be very high.
I can recall commissioning the inquiry Mr Osborne asked about, and I am aware that some work has proceeded on that matter. I do not recall any particular reason why a delay might have occurred. The present Law Reform Commission has been extremely good at producing reports in a timely way. I have been very pleased with the output of the commission. I am not sure why this particular report has not been produced. I certainly would not consider a year too long for a matter as important as this. I will make inquiries as to the status of that inquiry.
MR OSBORNE: I ask a supplementary question. Minister, you also said that there would be wide consultation with members of the public and interested groups, such as the legal and medical profession, during the progress of the review. Could you find out whether this has happened yet? If not, is it because in reality the Law Reform Commission is grossly understaffed and in urgent need of resources to assist the members. Will you undertake to adequately resource the ACT Law Reform Commission so that the commission will be able to continue these very worthwhile inquiries?
MR SPEAKER: Some of these questions are getting a bit lengthy.
MR HUMPHRIES
: I will have to go back and look at the report of the Justice and Community Safety Committee on the draft budget. I might have overlooked a recommendation there for additional resources for the Law Reform Commission. If it
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .