Robert Ray (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I present the seventh report of 2006 of the Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills. I also lay on the table Scrutiny of Bills Committee Alert Digest No. 9 of 2006, dated 6 September 2006.

Ordered that the report be printed.

I move:

That the Senate take note of the report.

In tabling the committee’s Alert Digest No. 9 of 2006 and seventh report of 2006 I wish to draw the Senate’s attention to the amendments made to the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Amendment Bill 2006. These amendments raise no issues within the committee’s terms of reference. However, as the committee has noted on page 12 of its Alert Digest No. 9 of 2006, the amendment to proposed new subsection 76(1), inserted by item 202 of schedule 1 of the bill, addresses a concern raised by the committee in its commentary on the bill in Alert Digest No. 5 of 2006. In that digest the committee expressed concern that the proposed new subsection would give the minister an unfettered discretion to delegate certain functions or powers to ‘a person’. Since its establishment, the committee has consistently drawn attention to legislation that allows significant and wide-ranging powers to anyone who fits the all-embracing description of ‘a person’. Generally, the committee prefers to see a limit set, either on the sorts of powers that might be delegated or on the categories of people to whom those powers might be delegated. The committee’s preference is that delegates be confined to the holders of nominated offices or to members of the senior executive service.

In this case, the committee noted that the proposed new subsection was expressed in the same terms, in this respect, as the existing subsection, and that as a result it may have been thought that the ministerial discretion required no justification. The committee also noted that the existing provision was enacted when the act was first passed, in 1976, before the establishment of this committee. In his response to the committee the minister confirmed that no thought had been given to amending the subsection, as it was in the same terms as the existing provision. However, the minister undertook to seek further advice on the issues raised by the committee and to give consideration to whether amendments should be made to meet the committee’s concerns. The amendment to proposed new subsection 76(1) of the bill stipulates that the functions and powers in question may be delegated to ‘the secretary of the department or an SES employee or acting SES employee of the department’. I am pleased to note that the minister’s word is his bond and, on behalf of the committee, I would like to thank him for this amendment, which addresses the committee’s concerns.

Question agreed to.