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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 10 Hansard (29 August) . . Page.. 3087 ..

MS TUCKER (6.00), in reply: Can I thank members for their comments. As members are aware, I will be moving amendments in the detail stage to clarify some terms and strengthen the definition of "satisfactory assessment process", which is the tool by which this legislation will have an effect.

The scrutiny of bills committee noted that although this bill put some conditions on entering into a contract this was by no means an unrestricted right in other circumstances.

In concluding the in-principle discussion, I would like to put on the record that I am grateful for the cooperative approach taken and work done by the Attorney-General's office and, through that office, officers of the Department of Justice and Community Safety on this bill. We appreciate too the work of other members who have discussed this bill and various options for amending it. I would also like to thank John O'Donovan of the Parliamentary Counsel's Office for his work.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill agreed to in principle.

Detail stage

Clause 1 agreed to.

Clause 2.

MS TUCKER (6.02): I move amendment No 1 circulated in my name [see schedule 3 at page 3101].

This amendment introduces a new commencement date of 25 November to allow affected financial institutions time to be prepared, while also ensuring that this new arrangement is in place for the pre-Christmas period. People are more vulnerable in this period, and credit institutions have played on the vulnerability in recent years. I believe that the three months lead time will be plenty of time, as the new requirement is not onerous and is certainly no more than most credit providers are already doing for first-time credit card contracts.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 2, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 3 agreed to.

Clause 4.


(6.03): The Greens will be opposing this clause. I am proposing to remove this clause from the amending bill. It was meant to be a technical, non-effective change, merely to tidy up the format of the section in accordance with contemporary drafting practice. However, after further discussion I had some concerns that this

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