Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Hansard source

I move opposition amendment (1) as circulated in my name:

(1)    Schedule 2, item 10, proposed subsection 48 (2), page 14 (line 15),

omit “notifying”

substitute

“procedures to be observed by a person who is notifying the Department”.

I want to pursue with the Minister for Education, Science and Training the question about the regulations. The amendment I am moving fulfils the commitment made by the Department of Education, Science and Training that a clarification statement would be made to explicitly state that prescribed events may only be determined expressly in the regulations. Of course, we are aware of the inclusion of the statement in the explanatory memorandum, so I recognise that both the department and the minister are acknowledging the validity of the concerns that we have raised about what I hope have been unintended consequences of the bill. These are concerns which, as the minister knows, have been raised in the inquiry by the Senate committee and by my own office in discussions with the department and with the former minister’s office. I am aware that such a statement in the amended explanatory memorandum would be considered relevant extrinsic material by any court considering this matter, but I would like to have an explanation from the minister as to why she believes it is preferable for the statement not to be in the bill, as my amendment is obviously seeking to do, and why it is that she has decided only to proceed as far as putting it in the explanatory memorandum rather than having a clear and explicit intention in the bill.

See this speech in context