Alert Digest No. 3 of 1996
18 June1996

MELBOURNE CITY LINK (AMENDMENT) BILL

1.1

This Bill was introduced into the Legislative Assembly on 29 May 1996 by the Honourable Rob Maclellan MP with the Honourable Jeff Kennett MP.

1.2

The purpose of the Bill is to amend the Melbourne City Link Act 1995 and the Melbourne City Link Authority Act 1994.

1.3 Part 2 - Melbourne City Link Act 1995

Clause 4 amends section 15 of the Act and changes the publication requirements in respect of variations of the Agreement. The Committee notes the comments in the Second Reading Speech:-

"Variations to the Agreement are not published until they are tabled in Parliament. For example, the amendments executed on 20 February were not tabled until Parliament met on 14 May. Further variations do not take effect until six sitting days of each House have elapsed. This process could cause unacceptable construction delays in respect of minor design changes.

So as to avoid delays in publishing and implementing variations to the Agreement, the Bill adopts a similar process to that applying under the Planning and Environment Act in respect of planning schemes. Under the proposed arrangements, the Minister must cause notice of the making of an amendment or variation to be published and to be made publicly available. As with planning scheme amendments, the variation will come into force when the notice is published. All variations must still be tabled in Parliament and will be subject to revocation by either House."

Clause 5 inserts a new section 31A into the Act. It enables Orders in Council which reserve land for the Project or a subsequent Order to deem any "declared road" on the land to be a declared road despite the reservation. This will enable sections of main roads, such as St. Kilda Road used for construction purposes to continue to be managed in accordance with the laws governing declared roads. Clause 6 inserts a new Division 2A which provides for the transfer of possession of reserved public land from current occupants. It replicates the relevant provisions of the Land Acquisition and Compensation Act 1985.

Clause 7 makes a consequential amendment to section 37 to include compensation rights conferred under new section 32D. Clause 8 amends Schedule 2. The Committee notes the comments in the Second Reading Speech:-

"The third set of amendments have been requested by the Stock Exchange. They are designed to ensure that dealings in Transurban stock can be carried out in accordance with Stock Exchange administrative requirements. One of the State Government's requirements for the City Link Project was a 20% limit on holdings of Transurban stock. It is proposed to amend Schedule 2 to the Act so that this limit will be enforced through divestiture rather than by prohibiting the initial registration of stock transfers."

Clause 9 amends section 21 and widens the delegation provision. The new clause now reads "The Authority may....delegate to a member or to the chief executive officer of the Authority or with the approval of the Minister, to any other person, or class of persons or body or to the holder of any office or position, any power of the Authority, other than this power of delegation." The Committee notes the comments in the Second Reading Speech:-

"At present that Act authorises the Authority to delegate functions to specified individuals. The amendments will provide greater administrative flexibility by also enabling the Authority to identify delegates by the roles they perform."

The Committee is concerned that the provision may contravene section 4D(a)(ii) in that it may make rights, freedoms or obligations dependent upon insufficiently defined powers. The Committee wrote to the Minister on 12 June 1996. The Minister responded by way of letter dated 14 June 1996. The relevant extract is set out:-

"Thank you for your letter of 12 June about clause 9 of this Bill.

I note that the Committee's draft report suggests that the clause widens the delegation power of the Melbourne City Link Authority under section 21 of the Melbourne City Link Authority Act 1994. It should be noted that section 21 as currently worded, confers power to delegate the Authority's powers to "any person or any body". The proposed amendments therefore do not widen the range of persons who may receive delegations. It deals with the manner in which an instrument of delegation identifies those delegates.

The efficient administration of a Project of the scale of the City Link will require delegations to be issued to public sector officials from a number of agencies and in some cases to staff employed by Transurban and its associate companies. It is not practicable to specify in the Act each power which may need to be delegated by the Authority or the persons to whom they may be delegated.

The capacity of the Authority to delegate its powers widely does not necessarily mean that administrative powers affecting rights, freedoms or obligations are insufficiently defined. Further, the requirement for the prior Ministerial approval of delegations to persons other than the members and Chief Executive of the Authority ensures accountability for the appropriateness of delegations. It should be noted that even delegations to officers of the Authority, other than the Chief Executive require my consent.

Further, while the Melbourne City Link Act 1995 confers substantial powers and functions directly on Transurban, these are restricted to carrying out its charter to build and operate the Link. Generally speaking the Act confers powers and functions which are governmental in nature on public authorities and officials rather than on Transurban.

I should add that in large part, clause 9 merely clarifies section 21 by stating explicitly in the Act what is already implicit under case law. In particular, I draw the Committee's attention to the following passage from the judgment of Mr Justice Neaves in Kelly v Watson (1985) 64 ALR 113 at 127:

"It is now well settled that a statutory provision of that kind permits a delegation to be made in such a way as to identify the delegate either by name or by office, and in the latter class of case, authorises a delegation expressed in ambulatory language operating to confer power on each person who from time to time holds, occupies or performs the duties of the designated office: Owendale Pty. Ltd v Anthony (1967) 117 CLR 539; Esmond Motors Pty Ltd v The Commonwealth (1970) 120 CLR 463 at 485."

The amended section 21 when read in conjunction with section 42A(2) of the Interpretation of Legislation Act 1984 will restate the position under case law.

The provision enabling delegates to be identified by class rather than individually is to achieve the same result in respect of private sector employees who do not hold "offices" as such but perform particular defined functions. For example, section 107 of the Melbourne City Link Act empowers the Authority to issue passes to enter restricted construction areas. In practice, this power will be delegated to security staff of Transurban. A delegation to an appropriately defined class of persons would avoid the need to issue a new delegation for each individual.

I trust this explains the nature of the proposed amendment and the need for them."

BALLARAT LANDS (LAKESIDE DEVELOPMENT) BILL

2.1

This Bill was introduced into the Legislative Assembly on 29 May 1996 by the Honourable Marie Tehan MP with the Honourable Phil Gude MP.

2.2

The purpose of the Bill is to revoke the permanent reservation over land known as the Lakeside Psychiatric Hospital site at Ballarat. Clause 3 revokes the land. Clause 4 deems the land to be unalienated land of the Crown. Clause 5 ensures the Registrars may make appropriate amendments.

The Committee makes no further comment.

FIREARMS (PROHIBITED FIREARMS) BILL

3.1

This Bill was introduced into the Legislative Assembly on 29 May 1996 by the Honourable Bill McGrath MP with the Honourable Phil Gude MP.

3.2

The purpose of the Bill is to amend the Firearms Act 1958 to make further provision with respect to the control of firearms. By way of background the Committee notes the comments in the Second Reading Speech:-

"The recent tragedy at Port Arthur has shocked all Australians. This terrible event has generated a consensus within the broad community and amongst all Governments on the need for a more effective, nationally uniform approach to firearms controls. The special meeting of the Australasian Police Ministers Council (APMC) on 10 May 1996 produced an historic agreement on nationally uniform firearms controls. The national agreement calls for:

• prohibition of certain types of firearms;
• establishment of a national buyback scheme to compensate owners of firearms affected by the prohibition;
• nationally uniform approaches to shooters licensing and firearms registration.

The APMC agreed that all jurisdictions should give effect to the prohibitions on certain types of firearms as quickly as possible."

3.3

Clause 4 cancels existing authorities for prohibited weapons. The Committee notes the comments in the Second Reading Speech:-

"Some persons currently legally possess semi-automatic centrefire rifles under prohibited firearms authorities issued over the past decade. These existing authorities need to be cancelled to ensure that the new prohibition applies to all semi-automatic centrefire rifles."

There are arguments as to whether the changes to the Act constitute a loss of rights or freedoms or are more akin to a loss of privilege or expectation as embodied by the existing legislation. The Committee refers the matter to Parliament for debate to determine whether the changes constitute a loss of rights or freedoms and if so whether the reduction of rights is due or undue.

Clause 5 ensures that the Registrar issuing authorities must have regard to any directions given by the Minister. New subsection (4B) provides for an approved compensation scheme in relation to surrendered firearms. The requirement that the Firearms Consultative Committee must recommend a firearm be a prohibited firearm is repealed.

GAMING ACTS (AMENDMENT) BILL

4.1

This Bill was introduced into the Legislative Assembly on 29 May 1996 by the Honourable Alan Stockdale MP with the Honourable Phil Gude MP.

4.2

The main purposes of the Bill are:-

• to make further provision in relation to gaming operator's licences;
• to provide for the release of Victorian gambling statistics and the release of certain information to a court;
• to amend disciplinary action provisions;
• to prohibit gaming at an approved venue after it is closed to the public;
• to remove references to restricted machines;
• to require approval of electronic monitoring systems before their use in approved venues;
• to require approval of variations to games and gaming machine types;
• to limit oral exclusion orders to 14 days;
• to remove surcharges on raffles, bingo and lucky envelopes;
• to ratify a third deed of variation to the management agreement for the Melbourne Casino;
• to make other miscellaneous amendments to gaming legislation;

4.3 Part 2 - Gaming Machine Control Act 1994

Clause 6 inserts new section 35A which sets out the entitlement of a former licensee on the grant of a new licence. Clause 8 inserts new section 38 which provides for disciplinary action in respect of gaming operators. Clause 9 inserts new sections 135A, 135B and 135C which relates to monies which payable by Trustees. Clause 11 removes the regulation of restricted machines from the Act. Clause 16 provides for approval by the Authority of variations to gaming machines types. Clause 22 amends the secrecy provisions to allow publication of statistical information on the Victorian gambling industry.

4.4 Part 3 - Casino Control Act 1991

Clause 27 inserts new provisions in relation to the ongoing monitoring of associates and others. Clause 29 requires organisers or promoters of junkets to have been approved by the Director of Casino Surveillance. Clause 32 amends the secrecy provisions. The Committee notes the comments in the Second Reading Speech:-

"The secrecy provision ..is amended so that the immunity from divulging information to a court will not apply to information which is in the possession of the casino operator (except for information which the operator acquires from other persons performing duties or exercising powers under the Act). This will enable the production to a court of evidence held by the casino operator for the prosecution of criminal offences relating or arising out of incidents in the casino."

4.5
Part 4 - Gaming and Betting Act 1994
Part 5 - Lotteries Gaming and Betting Act 1966
Part 6 - Racing Act 1958
Part 7 - Casino (Management Agreement) Act 1993

Clause 37 substitutes a new section 6AAAA which relates to accounts. Clause 38 inserts accounting provisions relating to lucky envelopes. Clause 43 provides for the third Deed of Variation to the management agreement for the Melbourne Casino to be ratified. Clause 45 inserts Schedule 4 into the Casino (Management Agreement) Act 1993 which contains the third Deed of Variation to the management agreement for the Melbourne Casino.

The Committee makes no further comment.

GAMING MACHINE CONTROL (COMMUNITY SUPPORT FUND) BILL

5.1

This Bill was introduced into the Legislative Assembly on 29 May 1996 by the Honourable Alan Stockdale MP with the Honourable Phil Gude MP.

5.2

The purpose of the Bill is to amend the Gaming Machine Control Act 1991 to change the mode of application of money in the Community Support Fund. Clause 4 makes provision for the above.

The Committee makes no further comment.

FORESTS (WOOD PULP AGREEMENT) BILL

6.1

This Bill was introduced into the Legislative Assembly on 29 May 1996 by the Honourable Marie Tehan MP with the Honourable Phil Gude MP.

6.2

The purpose of the Bill is to ratify an Agreement between the Minister administering the Forests Act 1958 and AMCOR Limited with respect to the continued supply of pulpwood for the manufacture of wood pulp at Maryvale.

6.3

Clause 3 defines "Agreement". The Agreement is set out in the Schedule. Clause 5 provides for ratification of the Agreement. Clause 7 provides for amendment or termination of the Agreement.

The Committee makes no further comment.

CONTINUE browsing Alert Digest No. 3 of 1996

Last update 29/7/99 ©Parliament of Victoria