Page 3205 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 19 August 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
In closing, I would like to add that it is extremely disappointing that the government did not support, for instance, my last amendment and some other amendments. There does not seem to be a lot of logicality to the way the government is proceeding on this bill. It is disappointing. I would hope that logic, best practice and sound evidence guide all the government’s actions. In that case, I would hope that this legislation is reviewable, updateable and always open to comment from housing providers. Legislation is only as good as its practice. If this is now set in cement, it would be extremely disappointing to all the organisations that provided comment and feedback to the government.
MR SESELJA (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (12.24): We support this amendment. It reflects other amendments and permits more matters to be reviewable in the AAT. Given the extensive powers given to the ACT government under this act to intervene in the affairs of third parties, it is only reasonable that there be an opportunity for administrative appeals. New appeal rights will be extended to cover decisions on removal from the register and decisions to place conditions on a registration.
While the opposition will support the bill as amended, we have not been comfortable with some key aspects of the bill. I have identified these concerns over the three separate sitting days when this bill was debated. I have moved Liberal amendments and have supported amendments by the Greens and by the government to ameliorate some of the problems with the bill. The government will consult with providers to ensure that it is not a regime that stifles innovation and provision of services by the non-government sector. This means that we have to come back another day to amend the act, and we will do so when numbers in this place have changed.
Finally, I would like to thank Dr Foskey and the minister for their support of various amendments during this debate. I particularly commend the providers in ACTCOSS and SoftLaw who have worked with MLAs to identify the problems and work constructively upon amendments.
MR HARGREAVES (Brindabella—Minister for Territory and Municipal Services, Minister for Housing, Minister for Multicultural Affairs) (12.26): I want to briefly make one or two small comments on the amendment. I appreciate Mr Seselja’s generosity, because we do not like to have people repeating.
I want to express my appreciation to a number of people for the work that they have done in bringing this bill forward. Firstly, I want to thank those people who conducted the consultation process back in November. That was a very good process. I would like to thank the community organisations that assisted in the process back in November. I would also like to thank the organisations who contributed in the recent round of consultation processes. I would like to extend my appreciation to the staff within our own offices—to Dr Foskey’s office and your own office, Mr Seselja, for the way in which they have dealt with my office through Jennie Mardel and others. Most importantly, I would like to express my appreciation to David Matthews and Sally Gibson from the department, who have worked very hard and very long and have had a really great outcome. Let us hope that we can all love each other just that little bit more.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .