Page 2653 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 5 June 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
However, that does not mean that the Assembly should surrender responsibility for the laws that regulate something so fundamental as the provision of electricity to Canberrans. The amendment that I am proposing here, amendment No 1, is modelled on the Education and Care Services National Law (ACT) Act 2011, section 6. The point of citing that particular section is that this Assembly on a previous occasion has made a similar amendment to enable this parliament to continue to have oversight on laws that will affect residents that we represent. There is absolutely no reason why this law should be any different. We have done it on previous occasions and we should continue to do it on this occasion.
I think I should perhaps be clear: as a matter of principle, this is not about saying that we want to break down national uniformity, that we want to somehow have the ACT being regularly inconsistent in these agreements. But we certainly want to retain the ability to have a level of oversight. In the process of undertaking a national reform—for example, it may be something that was particularly detrimental to the ACT because of our small size, our particular geography—there may be a basis on which the ACT Assembly would take the unusual decision, but nonetheless a decision, to have the ACT not adopt that particular element of the legislation. I do not think this is a decision the Assembly should take lightly. Our job as representatives is to ensure that we look to the national perspective but particularly represent the people of the ACT.
My amendment No 2, which is similar to amendment 1, ensures that regulations made under the national scheme operate in the same way as the regulation making powers ordinarily delegated to the executive by this Assembly. For all the same reasons, it is not appropriate to delegate our legislative responsibility and oversight entirely to the executive and the executives of other jurisdictions. It is not appropriate to completely abrogate responsibility for the regulations made under that law.
Amendment No 3 changes the nature of the power being delegated to the minister to ensure that local instruments have the same oversight requirements as other regulations made under the act. Given the nature of the instruments and the broad range of issues they cover, it is appropriate that the Assembly continues to have an oversight role. Ordinarily, when we delegate power to make a notifiable instrument it is for a very specific matter where the Assembly has made the clear determination that the particular instrument is relatively minor and operational rather than containing any significant policy matters. It is not the case with these instruments that we can be sure exactly what they will do and that it is appropriate to leave the matter entirely to the minister. Therefore, the Greens believe that the Assembly should have an oversight role.
The fourth and last amendment that I am proposing today is to deal with the regulation making power and now standard practice of including a Henry VIII clause. This is something that has certainly been remarked on by the scrutiny committee on more than one occasion. I have heard Mrs Dunne speak on this issue quite regularly, and rightly so. It is a considerable thing to delegate to the executive the ability to override an enactment of the Assembly. This extends for five years under this proposed legislation. The Greens think there should be an additional limitation on the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video