Page 2052 - Week 05 - Thursday, 3 May 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
(2) If payment was made (a) can the Minister detail the date of each meeting, (b) what were the amounts paid for each meeting and (c) the date that the payment was made for each meeting.
(3) Has any Labor Party meeting or Labor faction meeting of any description been held in the Assembly that was sponsored and or facilitated by the Minister or any of her employees; if so, (a) how many times, (b) on what dates and (c) was payment made at the time.
(4) If payment was made (a) can the Minister detail the date of each meeting, (b) what were the amounts paid for each meeting and (c) what is the date that the payment was made for each meeting.
Ms Gallagher: I am advised that the answer to the member’s question is as follows:
(1) I undertake a wide range of activities to fulfil my duties as the Member for Molonglo, a number of which involve use of my office facilities. This is consistent with the long established practice, as set out for example by the Clerk of the Assembly in a letter to the then Speaker on 27 June 2008.
(2) See answer to (1) above.
(3) See answer to (1) above.
(4) See answer to (1) above.
Courts—unsafe convictions
(Question No 2191)
Mr Rattenbury asked the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 29 March 2012:
(1) In relation to subsection 422(1)(f) of the Crimes Act 1900 which limits the number of inquiries into unsafe convictions that may be applied for, is the ACT the only Australian jurisdiction to limit the number of inquiries in such a way; if not, what other jurisdictions limit the number of applications and what are the relevant pieces of legislation.
(2) Has the Attorney-General and/or the ACT Government sought any briefings or information from the Justice and Community Safety Directorate, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court or the legal profession on the section and whether it is appropriate to remain on the ACT statute book; if so, what briefings or information were received.
(3) In relation to the Crimes Legislation Amendment Bill 2001 which created the limitation on the number of inquiries which is continued in the current subsection 422(1)(f), do directorate records exist from 2001 which indicate the policy rationale behind the limitation at the time; if so, what was the policy rationale.
(4) In relation to section 423 of the Crimes Act 1900 which creates the discretion for the Executive to order an inquiry into an unsafe conviction on its own initiative, what mechanisms exist for the ACT Government to make itself aware of new evidence that may be relevant to considerations of whether to exercise the discretion.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video