Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 8 Hansard (7 August) . . Page.. 2491 ..
Unit Titles Act-Revocation and determination of fees-Instrument No 118 of 2001 (S34, dated 20 June 2001).
Utilities Act-Appointments to the Essential Services Consumer Council-
Deputy Chair and Members-Instrument No 171 of 2001 (S41, dated 29 June 2001).
Member-Instrument No 181 of 2001 (No 28, dated 12 July 2001).
Vocational Education and Training Act-Determination of fees-Instrument No 166 of 2001 (S40, dated 29 June 2001).
Waste Minimisation Act 2001-Notice of commencement (28 June 2001) of Act (S40, dated 29 June 2001).
Waste Minimisation Act-
Determination of fees-Instrument No 158 of 2001 (S39, dated 28 June 2001).
Waste Minimisation Regulations 2001-Subordinate Law 2001 No 24 (S47, dated 17 July 2001).
Water and Sewerage Act-Revocation and determination of fees-Instrument No 122 of 2001 (S34, dated 20 June 2001).
Water Resources Act-Revocation and determination of fees-Instrument No 144 of 2001 (S34, dated 20 June 2001).
Workers' Compensation Act-Revocation and determination of fees-Instrument No 132 of 2001 (S34, dated 20 June 2001).
Bail Amendment Bill 2001 (No 2)
Debate resumed from 19 June 2001, on motion by Mr Stefaniak:
That this bill be agreed to in principle.
MR STANHOPE (Leader of the Opposition) (4.10): The Bail Amendment Bill 2001, which Labor supported, introduced a presumption against bail when two conditions were satisfied: the accused person was on bail for a serious offence and the accused person was alleged to have committed a second serious offence; that is, that bill applied only to the limited category of persons on bail for a serious charge who allegedly committed another serious offence.
All speakers on that bill referred principally to housebreaking; in particular, Mr Smyth referred to Operation Anchorage of the police, which resulted in 139 arrests. Twenty per cent of the people arrested during that operation were on bail at the time of their arrest. Seven people were arrested twice during the operation and one person was arrested four times. However, the provision could apply to any series of serious offences, for example, stealing motor vehicles or assaults.
In those circumstances, we supported the enactment of the presumption against bail, particularly as it could be seen as an extension of section 22 (1) (c) of the Bail Act, which permits the court to take into account the need to protect the community, having regard to the likelihood of the person committing an offence while on bail. Section 22 (1) (c) is not limited to serious offences, which raises a point that the