Clause 8 of the Bill proposes to insert a new section 39A in the Ambulance Services Act 1986 stating that it is the intention of 42B of the Act to alter or vary Section 85 of the Constitution Act 1975.

Section 42B is proposed to be inserted in the Act by clause 9 of the Bill.

I make the following statement under Section 85(5) of the Constitution Act 1975 of the reasons for altering or varying Section 85 of the Constitution Act 1975 by proposed new Section 42B of the Ambulance Services Act 1986.

New Section 42B contains two saving provisions relating to the acts or omissions of trustees.

Clause 5 inserts a new Section 3A in the Act relating to interpretation of trust instruments, and clause 6 inserts a new Section 23A which applies to trusts in relation to abolished ambulance services.

The Act, as amended by this Bill, has effect with respect to orders under Section 23, and with respect to trust instruments in relation to predecessor ambulance services of a successor ambulance service created by the order, as if all of these amendments were in force when the order was made.

They apply retrospectively to confer an entitlement or eligibility under a trust which applied in relation to each former ambulance service upon each new successor ambulance service from the date that the relevant order creating the successor ambulance service took effect.

This is to validate any distributions that have already been made under a trust on the mistaken basis that a successor was eligible or entitled, as a result of the creation of the succeeding ambulance service, to benefit from a trust because the predecessor ambulance service was so eligible or entitled.

New Section 42B(1) provides that anything done or omitted to be done before the commencement date of the Bill by a trustee that would not have been a breach of trust if this Bill was enacted at the time of the act or omission, is not to be regarded as constituting a breach of trust and the trustee is not liable for breach of trust.

The reason for this limitation of the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is that it is appropriate to protect trustees and those who have benefited from trusts, where the trustee has distributed a benefit on the mistaken basis that a successor ambulance service was eligible or entitled to benefit under a trust that applied in relation to one of its predecessor ambulance services. This protection accords with the intention of the Bill to validate such distributions.

New subsection 42B(2) provides that nothing effected by this Bill is to be regarded as making a trustee liable for a breach of trust on account of anything done or omitted to be done before the commencement date of the Bill, that would not have constituted a breach of trust has this Bill never been enacted.

The reason for this limitation of the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is that it is appropriate to protect a trustee, and those who have benefited from trusts administered by the trustee, where the trustee has acted lawfully in the past.

There is to be no liability in relation to any act or omission, where liability might otherwise now arise solely as a result of the retrospective application of the changes to the law contained in this Bill.

For example, if a trustee had correctly considered that the eligibility of a former ambulance service to benefit under a particular trust was not conferred upon its successor ambulance service by the Act as it was then in force. No one should be able to challenge that decision as a result of the effects of this Bill.