George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Minister for the Arts and Sport) Share this | Hansard source

I think Senator Stott Despoja has, if I may say so, demonstrated precisely why it would not be good drafting to gloss the word ‘substantial’ with some sort of mathematical formula so that we might have a silly argument over whether 25 per cent was not substantial and 26 per cent was. That is why the practical and commonplace drafting solution to this issue has been to use the word ‘substantial’ in its plain English meaning and not to subject it to mathematical or arithmetical formulae. This is the basis upon which a ministerial discretion—a reviewable ministerial discretion, I might say—is exercisable. I might venture to suggest that what mathematical formula might constitute a substantial change in one course, in certain circumstances might be different from what would constitute a substantial change in a different course in other circumstances—depending upon, among other things, considerations of scarcity. These are all very good reasons why the definition of substantial has not been limited by invariant arithmetical criteria but has been left to the flexible ordinary English word, as the word is usually used in statutes.

Question put:

That schedule 5 stand as printed.