Page 1015 - Week 04 - Thursday, 7 May 2020

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


The complaint-handling amendment expands the functions of the ACT Human Rights Commission so that it can consider complaints in relation to the abuse of vulnerable people. After the commencement of the amendment, a person who is concerned that a vulnerable person is being abused, neglected or exploited, or the vulnerable person themselves, may complain to the Human Rights Commission and have the matter dealt with through that mechanism. It is not dissimilar to some of the powers that the commission already has, where they can use an escalating series of interventions to seek an effective outcome without necessarily needing to take a matter to a judicial environment as such.

Finally, the bill amends the Retirement Villages Act 2012 to allow annual budget meetings and annual management meetings at retirement villages to be postponed until after the COVID-19 emergency, to authorise that a meeting of residents can be conducted through means other than in person, and to provide that there will be no limit on the number of residents a person can act as proxy for. These amendments are designed to ensure good governance and legislative compliance without compromising the health and safety of retirement village residents.

At the moment, the act requires that a meeting must take place, must take place in person and must take place by certain dates. This is designed to recognise that the practicalities of the pandemic situation require that, particularly with retirement villages which contain residents who are perhaps in the more vulnerable categories, we can bring some flexibility to the process of having their annual meeting but at the same time ensure that there are continuing governance processes and rules so that residents have access to budgets and the like as these meetings take place.

In conclusion, these amendments are designed to support the continued operations of various ACT government agencies during the COVID-19 emergency and protect vulnerable members of our community whilst maintaining a degree of oversight and a degree of legislative conditions. I think that they will provide the right balance. A number of them will not be used unless necessary. Certainly, with the current situation in the ACT, I would not anticipate activating some of these provisions, as I have referenced earlier in my remarks. But, should we see a spike or an outbreak in the ACT, we are now in a position where we have the provisions in place if we need to activate them quickly during the current public health emergency.

I commend the bill to the Assembly.

MR HANSON (Murrumbidgee) (4.46): I will comment on various aspects of this bill, primarily the Attorney-General’s area. The bill seems to be focused on the practical measures needed by frontline operators to continue to deliver essential services during this difficult time. It was put to us in our briefings that provisions were included in this bill only if they related to urgent and operational matters. It is also worth noting that each section is limited to the COVID emergency period, although that exact timing seems to differ as required in each case.

With that in mind, I will briefly touch on some of the key areas, and the first is the change to the Associations Incorporation Act 1991. The substantive change is, as


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