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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 9 Hansard (5 September) . . Page.. 2855 ..


MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

a conviction which is spent in the ACT can be regarded as spent in those jurisdictions, and vice versa.

Other jurisdictions do not operate such schemes and they will require disclosure of ACT convictions, regardless of whether they are spent under ACT legislation. In Victoria, for example, where there is not a spent convictions scheme, a person who was exempt from disclosure here would have to disclose a conviction if they were in Victoria and were asked about, for example, a job that they were seeking in Victoria.

The basic rule is that the ACT can apply its spent legislation scheme only in relation to matters for which it has legislative power and only to the extent that other jurisdictions' legislation does not apply. The ACT scheme may exempt a person from disclosing an ACT spent conviction in a job application in the ACT but not necessarily in Victoria, as I have said. It will not exempt a person from disclosing an ACT spent conviction when applying for a visa to a foreign country if that country's laws require the disclosure of all convictions.

Mr Speaker, despite those qualifications, this is an appropriate scheme which has drawn upon the experience of other jurisdictions, and one which I am sure will serve members of this community well. If as a community we feel concerned about the access people have to information, then it is possible to revisit this arrangement.

I believe that the balance is right, and I think it is appropriate for us to allow people who have shown their capacity to live within the terms of the law to move in the community without the stigma associated with criminal conviction. I thank members for their support.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill agreed to in principle.

Detail Stage

Bill, by leave, taken as whole.

MS TUCKER (10.49): I ask for leave to move amendments Nos 1 to 6 circulated in my name together.

Leave granted.

MS TUCKER: I move:

Nos 1 to 6-

Clause 19, page 10-

Line 10, paragraph 19 (1) (a), omit "or childcare worker", substitute ", aged care provider or provider of care for people with a disability, or childcare worker, aged care worker or worker with people with a disability".

Line, 14, subparagraph 19 (1) (b) (i), after "children", insert ", older people or people with a disability".

Line 15, subparagraph 19 (1) (b) (ii), after "child-care centre", insert "hospital, community care facility, residential care facility,".


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