"This Bill was introduced into the Legislative Assembly
on 14 September 1994 by The Honourable Phil Gude MP on behalf of The
Honourable Pat McNamara MP with The Honourable Marie Tehan MP.
The Committee held a Public
Hearing on 26 September 1994.
The Committee heard evidence from the following witnesses:
-
Mr Robert Richter QC appeared on behalf of the Victorian
Council of Civil Liberties;
Mr Iain Stewart appeared on behalf of "Save Albert Park"
Mr Jack Hammond appeared on behalf of the Victorian Speed Boat Club(Inc);
Ms Susan Cohen and Mr Damian Murphy appeared on behalf of the Victorian
Society of Labor Lawyers;
The Committee received written submissions or letters
from the following:-
Mrs Shirley Scholes;
Australian Civil Liberties Union;
Mr Colin Crawford;
Mr W. Bradbury;
Mr Peter Logan;
Mr William H. Kyme;
Ms Elizabeth Grieb;
Lord Somers Camp and Power House;
Mr Gordon H. Macmillan;
Mr Frederick C. Shillabeer;
Mr Peter Arrowsmith;
Ms Jane Touzeau;
City of Port Phillip;
The Committee wishes to thank all those people who gave
evidence and sent written submissions and letters.
Chairman's Note
In keeping with the practice of the Committee, the draft
Alert Digest was sent to the Honourable Pat McNamara MP, the Minister
for Tourism by facsimile on 29 September 1994. This practice has been
adopted in order to ensure that the Committee's recommendations can
be considered and responded to by the Minister before the tabling of
the Alert Digest in the Parliament. The Committee has adopted the practice
of including the Minister's responses and comments in the Alert Digest.
The Chairman received a letter by facsimile from the Minister
dated 3 October 1994. Extracts of that letter are set out at paragraphs
8.7, 8.8, 8.9, 8.10, 8.12, 8.14, 8.16 and 8.19.
In response to the comments and suggestions made by the
Committee, the Minister has indicated that House Amendments will be
made in respect of Clauses 30 and 42 of the Bill. The Minister has also
responded positively to the Committee's comments and suggestions in
respect of Clauses 27, 38 and 49.
On behalf of the Committee the Chairman wishes to thank
the Minister for his prompt, positive and thoughtful response.
The main purposes of the Bill are to establish the Australian
Grand Prix Corporation and to facilitate the holding of the Annual Formula
One Grand Prix at Albert Park.
Part 1
Clause 3 sets out the various definitions of the
Act.
"Albert Park" means the land shown on the plan
set out in Schedule 1.
"Committee of Management' means the Committee of
Management of Albert Park appointed under the Crown Land (Reserves)
Act 1978.
"Declared area" is the area declared under section
27 to be the declared area in respect of that year. Pursuant to section
27 the "declared" area is the area declared by the Minister
"being part or all of Albert Park specified in the notice together
with such other land (if any) surrounded by Albert Part". See 8.7
for further explanation of the effect of section 27 in relation to the
"declared area".
'Race period" is the period declared under section
27 which effectively means that the Grand Prix is limited to one week
in any one year.
Part 2 - Australian Grand Prix Corporation
Clause 7 establishes the Australian Grand Prix
Corporation.
Clause 9 provides that the Corporation is subject
to the direction and control of the Minister in the performance of its
functions and exercise of its powers. The membership of the Corporation
consists of between 5 and 9 members appointed by the Governor in Council.
Clauses 11 and 12 provide for vacancies, resignations and acting
appointments. Clause 13 provides for the disclosure of interests.
Clauses 14 to 17 set out procedural formalities.
Clause 18 gives the chief executive officer or
a delegate of the Corporation personal immunity for anything done or
reasonably done in good faith. Clause 19 provides that the Corporation
may appoint a person approved by the Minister as the chief executive
officer of the Corporation.
Clause 20 sets out the functions of the Corporation.
Clause 21 sets out the powers of the Corporation. The powers
listed between (a) to (o) include the power to carry out works at Albert
Park.
Clause 22 gives the Corporation the power to delegate
any of its powers, in writing, to a member or to the chief executive
officer of the Corporation. The Committee notes that this power
of delegation is limited. The clause also gives the Corporation
the power to delegate to any other person or body in writing, any power
of the Corporation, with the approval of the Minister. The Committee
notes that this power of delegation is not so limited but must be done
so with the approval of the Minister.
Clause 23 requires the Corporation to pay all money
received into a banking account. Clause 24 gives the Corporation
the power to borrow and invest money.
The Business Plan
Clause 25 requires the Corporation to prepare a
annual business plan and give a copy to the Minister and the Treasurer.
The Plan must include a statement of corporate intent, information on
accounting policies, financial statements and information on such other
matters as the Minister and the Treasurer directs. The Corporation must
consider any comments made by the Minister and the Treasurer and following
consultation with the Minister must make any such changes as are agreed
to within three months of submitting the Plan.
Part 3 - Formula One Events
Clause 27 gives the Minister the power to "declare"
that "other land (if any) surrounded by Albert Park" constitutes
part of the area for the purposes of the Grand Prix provided the appropriate
notice is inserted into the Government Gazette. Note that "Albert
Park" is defined in clause 3 as the land shown hatched on the plan
set out in Schedule 1. The Committee sought clarification from the Department
of Arts, Sports and Tourism as to the meaning of "other land
(if any) surrounded by Albert Park". The Committee's interpretation
is that the "other land surrounded by Albert Park" refers
to the small plain area of land shown on the hatched land near Albert
Road in Schedule 1. The area is in fact Commonwealth land which is reserved
for the army. The Minister may "declare" this area for the
purposes of the Grand Prix by way of publication in the Government Gazette.
Works to be performed in the declared area are likely
to include the erection of fences etc which are necessary to protect
people from harm during the event. Other associated works may include
road construction or diversion, the removal, relocation or planting
of trees, installation of services, construction of other buildings
or facilities whether of a permanent or temporary nature or demolition
works or works altering the topography of Albert Park.
The Minister responded to the Committee in a letter dated
3 October 1994. The relevant extract is set out:
"I confirm that the declared area can only comprise
part or all of Albert Park (which is defined in clause 3 to be the
area shown hatched in Schedule 1) together with the Commonwealth land
reserved for the Army wholly surrounded by the Park."
Makes rights, freedoms or obligations dependent upon
insufficiently defined administrative powers - section 4D(a)(ii)
Makes rights, freedoms or obligations dependent upon
non-reviewable administrative decisions - section 4D(a)(iii)
Clause 28 provides that the Corporation must not
undertake any works without a licence. The licence is granted by the
Committee of Management on such terms and conditions as are specified.
The Committee of Management may grant a licence within 7 days. In the
event of a dispute, the Minister administering the Act and the Minister
administering the Crown Land (Reserves) Act 1978 may grant the
licence on such terms and conditions as are specified.
The Committee notes that the Committee of Management is
appointed by the Governor in Council pursuant to section 14 of the Crown
Land (Reserves) Act 1978. The members of the Corporation are appointed
by the Governor in Council pursuant to section 10 of this Bill. The
Ministers adjudicate between the two Government bodies in the event
of a dispute.
The Minister wrote to the Committee on 3 October 1994.
The relevant extract is set out:
"The Digest asserts that the decision of the
Ministers is non-reviewable. This comment is misleading in that a
range of administrative remedies are available to review such decisions."
Note the discussion and arguments as to the trespass
upon rights and freedoms are referred to at clauses 42 and 50.
Makes rights, freedoms or obligations dependent upon
insufficiently defined administrative powers - section 4D(a)(ii)
Makes rights, freedoms or obligations dependent upon
non-reviewable administrative decisions - section 4D(a)(iii)
Clause 29 provides that the Corporation must take
reasonable steps to consult with the Committee of Management and persons
affected. Pursuant to subsection (a) of clause 29, the Corporation "must
take reasonable steps to consult with the Committee of Management and
any person having a right of occupation of any part of Albert Park."
The Minister wrote to the Committee on 3 October 1994.
The relevant extract is set out:
"The limitation on rights provided for in this
clause mirrors that in the South Australian Act. Its rationale is
also explained in the Second Reading Speech".
Note the discussion in relation to the non payment
of compensation is referred to at clause 50.
Trespasses unduly upon rights and freedoms - section
4D(i)
Makes rights, freedoms or obligations dependent upon
non-reviewable administrative decisions - section 4D(a)(iii)
Clause 30 gives the Corporation the power to control
the declared area in respect of a race period. Pursuant to subclause
(3), a person may only carry on business in premises in the declared
area to the extent and in accordance with the conditions that the Corporation
after consultation with the Committee of Management approves. In the
event of a dispute, the Minister makes the final decision.
Subclause (4) suspends the rights and interests
of any person, other than the Corporation in relation to the declared
area during the race period. The exceptions, those who carry on businesses
in accordance with licences granted by the Corporation are set out in
subclause(3).
The Committee notes the comments in the Second Reading
Speech referring to the South Australian legislation:
"During the race period which will not exceed
7 days in any one year, as declared by the Minister acting jointly
with the Minister administering the Crown Land (Reserves) Act 1978
, the Corporation will be responsible for the management and control
of the declared area in line with the position under the South Australian
legislation. Also in line with the South Australian legislation, the
rights and interests of any other person are suspended in relation
to the declared area during the race period.
However, unlike the South Australian legislation,
clause 30 of the Bill makes specific provision for businesses in the
declared area to continue to operate during the race period subject
to reaching agreement with the Corporation, in consultation with the
Committee of Management. Any dispute will be resolved by the Minister.
The Government envisages that there will be mutual benefits for business
in the declared area reaching agreement with the Corporation."
The Minister wrote to the Committee on 3 October 1994.
The relevant extract is set out:
"The Government is currently drafting a House
Amendment that would give businesses affected by this clause a right
to claim compensation based on business performance in a normal (not
Grand Prix) trading situation. At the same time the Government envisages
that it will be in the interests of businesses to operate during the
Grand Prix and clause 30 is intended to facilitate negotiations to
this effect between the Corporation and the businesses."
Note the discussion in relation to the non payment
of compensation is referred to at clause 42.
Clause 31 gives the Corporation the power to enter
Albert Park for the purposes of carrying out any of its functions.
Clauses 32 and 33 give the Corporation the power
to fence off lands and close roads for the purposes of performing works.
Note that the discussion in relation to the non payment
of compensation is referred to at clause 42.
Makes rights, freedoms or obligations dependent upon
insufficiently defined administrative powers - section 4D(a)(ii)
Makes rights, freedoms or obligations dependent upon
non-reviewable administrative decisions - section 4D(a)(iii)
Clause 34 requires the Corporation to restore the
declared area to a reasonable decision after the end of the event. The
Committee of Management determines whether the restoration is reasonable.
In the event of a dispute, the Ministers' joint decision is final.
The Minister wrote to the Committee on 3 October 1994.
The relevant extract is set out:
"The Government considers that resolution by
Ministers of any dispute between two public bodies to be appropriate."
Note the discussion in relation to the non payment
of compensation is referred to at clause 42, ie: at 8.16.
Clause 35 gives the Corporation the power to control
and charge any filming and television rights.
Trespasses unduly upon rights or freedoms - section
4D(a)(i)
Clause 36 provides that any activity carried on
by the Corporation within the declared area during the race period
does not constitute a nuisance.
Clause 37 gives the Corporation the power to remove
any vehicles left unattended during the race period.
Clause 38 provides that the provisions of the Road
Safety Act 1986 do not apply to the drivers and vehicles of a Formula
One Event during the race period.
Clause 38(b) may contravene sections 4D(a)(iv) or
(v). The Committee suggested to the Minister that the provision be amended
to provide for Ministerial approval.
The Minister wrote to the Committee in a letter dated
3 October 1994. The relevant extract is set out:
"The Government accepts the Committee's suggestion
that the exemption be granted with the approval of the Minister rather
than the Corporation."
Trespasses unduly upon rights or freedoms - section
4D(a)(i)
Clause 39 provides that the laws relating to vehicle
emissions and noise do not apply to the declared area during a race
period.
Clause 40 prohibits unauthorised advertising during
a race period except as permitted by the Corporation.
Clause 41 provides that the Corporation must pay
to the Committee of Management a sum of no more than $100,000 within
14 days after the end of the race period.
Trespasses unduly upon rights or freedoms - section
4D(a)(i)
Clause 42 provides that no compensation is payable
in respect of anything done or arising out of sections 28, 30, 32 and
33. Note that clause 50 prevents the Supreme Court from awarding compensation
in respect of this clause or anything done under it.
(i) Clause 28
The Victorian Council for Civil Liberties suggested in
its submission to the Committee that in relation to section 28 it may
mean that if the Corporation undertakes works not in accordance with
a licence and a person suffers as a result that a person is denied the
right to seek compensation in the Supreme Court. The countervailing
argument is that if the Corporation does not perform works in accordance
with the licence then there has been a breach of the law, notwithstanding
the exclusion provision in section 42. Those people who genuinely suffer
as a consequence of the failure to perform works in accordance with
a licence should not be prevented from bringing an action.
The Minister wrote to the Committee on 3 October 1994.
The relevant extract is set out:
"There are a number of references to negligent
acts in the Digest. The Government proposes to amend clause 42 to
make it clear that only things that would be done in accordance with
clauses 28, 30, 32 or 33 would receive the benefit of clause 42. Negligent
actions would not fall within this protection.
On the other hand it is clear that, if the Bill is
passed, Parliament is providing for an annual Grand Prix to occur
at Albert Park and that necessarily will have an impact on some rights.
I would request that the Digest reflect this fact and , given that
this is the central purpose of the Bill, refer such matters to Parliament
for debate."
(ii) Clause 30
In relation to section 30, the Committee has already noted
that the rights and interests of those people in the declared area are
suspended during the race period except to the extent that businesses
may be conducted in accordance with the approval of the Committee of
Management. Clause 42 provides that no compensation is payable to any
one from anything arising out of that section 30.
(iii) Clause 32
In relation to section 32, under 8.11 the Committee has
already noted that a fencing power is reasonable. Pursuant to clause
42 no compensation is payable to anyone who may be affected by the fencing
off of the lands and roads. In this respect clause 42 may contravene
section 4D(a)(i).
(iv) Clause 33
In relation to section 33, under 8.11 the Committee has
already noted that the power to close roads is reasonable. Pursuant
to clause 42 no compensation is payable to anyone who may be affected
by the closure of the roads. In this respect clause 42 may contravene
section 4D(a)(i).
Part 4
Clause 43 ensures that no other motor races can
be held at Albert Park other than the specified race period. Clause
44 grants the Corporation the proprietary interest in all the Grand
Prix insignia and sets out the offences relating to its misuse.
Clause 45 provides that goods which have not been
authorised pursuant to clause 44 may be seized. The goods must be returned
if proceedings are not instituted within 3 months of their seizure and
compensation may be sought if they have wrongly destroyed. Clause
46 provides that the Committee of Management or a member or an employee
of the Committee is not liable for any loss or damage arising principally
from any works performed by the Corporation. Clause 47 confers
the powers of management on the Committee.
Trespasses unduly upon rights and freedoms - section
4D(a)(i)
Clause 48 exempts any works authorised by the Corporation
from the requirements under the Building Act 1993, the Planning
and Environment Act 1987, the Albert Land Act 1972, the Crown
Land (Reserves) Act 1978, any planning scheme or permits required
by an authority and the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works
Act 1958.
Trespasses unduly upon rights and freedoms - section
4D(a)(i)
Clause 49 provides that the Freedom of Information
Act 1982 does not apply to certain confidential contractual information
relating to the granting of the Grand Prix and any associated companies,
partnerships and trusts. The clause also covers the wider category of
information and documentation relating to "granting the right to
hold and approved motor sport event". The Committee also notes
the retrospective effect of the clause in that it applies to any documents
"created before, on or after the commencement of this section".
The Minister wrote to the Committee in a letter dated
3 October 1994. The relevant extract is set out:
"It is considered that the comments in the Digest
in relation to this clause are not unreasonable. In respect of Business
Plans specified under clause 25, only those part of such Plans, if
any, falling within clause 49(1) would be specifically exempt from
disclosure under this clause."
The Committee notes that the proceedings referred to in
the Administrative Appeals Tribunal have finished. His Honour Judge
Fagan handed down his decision on 16 September 1994 which granted access
to a limited number of documents. Access was refused to all other documents
in the proceedings on the basis of protection of the public interest.
An extract of the judgment is set out:
"While it may be accepted that opinions will
differ over the appropriate use of the park, I think that these concerns
do qualify for consideration as expressions of concern sufficient
to raise an issue of public interest as that expression is understood
in Smith's case. I accept that this is a major public park, the disposition
of which affects a great number of people whether commuters, residents,
recreationers or sports persons. Further, the issue of the disposition
of the park has aroused substantial public awareness and is in the
hands of the Government.
At the same time, there are factors which tend to
show that this issue is of limited significance.
It is an issue insofar as use of the park is concerned
that affects a limited number of Victorians. The loss of use is for
a limited time. The Grand Prix itself involves use of the track on
only one day. Altogether, there are no more than six days of Grand
Prix racing use of the track per year for a limited number of years.
Although at a cost, the park itself will be upgraded and the evidence
is that it needs that. The time involved for renovation and upgrading
is not extensive. Alternative traffic routes in the area are available.
The noise factor involves a relatively short time. The depth and breadth
of public controversy is not clear. Although there has been substantial
press coverage of the issue and although it is clear that some number
of people are acutely interested in resisting the use of the park
for the proposed purposes, it is far from clear to me that the group
involved is not simply a relatively isolated few locals with a capacity
to achieve publicity for their views.
Mr Murphy sought to make use of the respondent's
reliance upon the confidentiality agreement. He argued, in effect,
that it was contrary to the public interest not to disclose the documents
where the foundation for the confidentiality was simply an agreement
that the respondent and the companies had made among themselves and
others. The right of the public to know should not be stultified by
agreements for confidentiality made between the parties to the activities
in question.
On the other hand, as has been observed, modern governments
are and may necessarily be involved in the management (including the
funding) of business, commercial or financial undertakings these days
either on their own as government or in some form of joint enterprise
with other entities. Unless governments were able to offer and in
fact, honour confidentiality to those with whom they deal in business,
then it is clear that their capacity to participate in business activities
would be severely limited. Furthermore, it is far from clear to me
that the terms of the confidentiality clause are such as to prevent
a disclosure of information covered by the agreement as a result of
an order of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. It seems to me that,
at most, damages may be payable if such an order were made but even
that is unlikely, in my opinion, because it is far from clear that
a disclosure as a result of an order constitutes a breach. Whatever
the remedy available (if any) to these parties for a breach of confidence
(if any) by any of them, however, it is clear that their negotiations
and dealings with the Government were intended to be confidential.
In the end, I think the aspects of interest relied
upon by Mr Murphy, more particularly as re-formulated, do qualify
for recognition as aspects of the public interest as that notion is
to be understood. They are, however (contrary to his argument), of
insufficient weight, in my opinion, taken individually or collectively
for the Tribunal to form the opinion (bearing in mind the incidence
of the burden) that the public interest requires that access to the
documents in question should be granted under the Act......
There is no real reason to think that the extent
of potential liability will not in the end be disclosed. There is
no real reason to think that the public accountability for the decision-making
process and the liabilities incurred by the Government and the companies
will in the end be avoided. There is no real evidence to suggest that
Walker has acted with any relevant conflict of interest. There is
no real reason to think that any significant misuse of the public
park will occur or that there has been or is public controversy on
the issue of such breadth and depth as to require disclosure of the
documents. Rather than the public interest being stultified by the
confidentiality agreement, it is my opinion, in the circumstances
of this case, that the public interest would be served by the maintenance
of confidentiality of the information contained in the documents under
discussion at least while the currency of that information remains
so that business will not be discouraged from dealing with the Government.
This is not a case where the claim for confidentiality
is sham or spurious. The nature of the subject matter of the negotiations
itself having regard to the competitive market for the event and of
the information about the companies communicated to the Government
in confidence merits and attracts confidentiality for those negotiations
and those communications. The verbal requirements for confidentiality
during the negotiations and the written confidentiality agreement
(despite an argument which I reject that the scope of the agreement
was by reason of the definition it contained of "information")
serve to show the importance the parties attached to the confidentiality
of the information involved in the negotiations. Nor is it a case
where any issue of illegality, unlawfulness, irregularity, antinomy,
impropriety or sharp practice on the part of the respondent or the
two companies in the handling of or arrangements about public funds
has been raised.
For the Tribunal to override genuine business confidences
reposed in the Government of the State by business, commercial or
financial undertakings in the kind of circumstances involved in this
case would be to maim the business arm of the State."
Clause 51 gives the Governor in Council the power
to make regulations.
Part 5
Part 5 makes miscellaneous amendments to other Acts.
Variation of section 85 of the Constitution Act
1975 (section 4D(b)(i)(ii) and (iii) of the Parliamentary Committees
Act 1968)
Clause 50 declares its intention to alter or vary
section 85 of the Constitution Act 1975 to the extent necessary to prevent
the Supreme Court awarding compensation in respect of anything done
under sections 28, 29, 30, 32 or 33 or entertaining actions relating
to a matter referred to in section 34(1) or 46 or of kind referred to
in section 29 or 30. It is convenient to examine the provisions in turn.
The Committee also refers to its previous discussion in respect of the
non-payment of compensation at
Clause 28 provides that the Corporation must not
undertake any works without a licence.
Clause 32 gives the Corporation the power to fence
off land where necessary for the purposes of performing works and holding
the Grand Prix.
Clause 33 gives the Corporation the power to close
roads where necessary for the purposes of performing works and holding
the Grand Prix.
The Committee notes the comments in the Second Reading
Speech:
"The Bill empowers the Corporation to carry
out works in Albert Park pursuant to a licence issued under clause
28 and to manage the declared area during the race period. The Bill
also allows the fencing or cordoning off of areas and the temporary
or permanent closure of roads. All this is necessary in realising
the overall plan for Albert Park, the establishment of a temporary
Grand Prix circuit and associated infrastructure and the staging of
the Formula One event. As part of the revitalisation of Albert Park
some current features of the park will be relocated.
Whilst all of the permanent or temporary works will
be carried out expeditiously to minimise disruption, the extent of
the transformation of the Park will be such that it is not appropriate
that individuals with interests in the Park should not be able to
seek compensation in respect of the work done in a particular area
of the Park."
Clause 29 requires the Corporation to consult with
persons affected before the race period. The Committee notes the comments
in the Second Reading Speech:
"Clause 29 of the Bill requires the Corporation
before the race period in any year to take reasonable steps to consult
with the Committee of Management and any person having a right of
occupation of any part of Albert Park in respect of a year. The clause
also requires the Corporation to consider any reasonable representations
made by any such person.
The Corporation in fulfilling this requirement will
receive many submissions, many of which will be contradictory. It
is a matter of judgement for the Corporation to assess these submissions,
consistent with the performance of its functions under the Bill. The
Corporation is subject to the direction and control of the Minister
in the performance of its functions and the exercise of its powers.
It is not appropriate that an individual should be
able to bring an action in relation to a particular representation
made to the Corporation or generally in relation to the process of
consultation."
Clause 30 gives the Corporation the power to manage
the declared area during the race period. Businesses can only operate
during the race in accordance with approval from the Committee of Management
and the Corporation. The provision suspends the rights and interests
of any person other than the Corporation in relation to the declared
area except for businesses as aforementioned. The Committee notes the
comments in the Second Reading Speech:
"Clause 30 requires the Corporation to manage
and control the declared area during the race period in any year.
That clause also provides that the rights of any person other than
the Corporation are suspended during the race period in any year.
However, specific provision is made for business in the declared area
to continue to operate during the race period, subject to reaching
agreement with the Corporation.
The provisions of this clause are required to ensure
that the race and associated events are staged effectively and that
the contractual obligations associated with the staging of any race
are honoured. The position of any individual businesses affected by
those provisions is protected by the requirement to consult with the
Committee of Management and the power given to the Minister to resolve
any disputes. The Minister also has a general power to direct the
Corporation in the performance of its functions and the exercise of
its powers by reason of clause 9 of the Bill."
Clause 34 requires the declared area to be restored
to a reasonable condition as soon as practicable after the end of the
race period. Clause 34(3) provides that in the event of a dispute
between the Committee of Management and the Corporation as to the standard
of the restoration, the Ministers make the final determination. The
Committee notes the comments in the Second Reading Speech:
"Clause 34 of the Bill does require the Corporation
to restore the declared area to a condition reasonably comparable
to that which it was in before the staging of the Formula One event
in any one year. However, as the Park is a public asset it is not
appropriate that individuals should be able to bring actions in respect
of the operations of that clause. The clause requires the Minister
administering the Act and the Minister administering the Crown Land
(Reserves) Act 1978 to resolve any dispute between the Corporation
and the Committee of Management as to the standard of restoration.
Both of these Minsters are responsible to the Parliament for the administration
of the clause."
Clause 46 provides that the Committee of Management
or a member or an employee of the Committee is not liable for any loss
or damage arising principally because of the works or anything done
or omitted to be done by the Corporation in accordance with a licence
conferred on it. The Committee notes the comments in the Second Reading
Speech:
"Clause 46 of the Bill exempts the Committee
of Management from any liability for any loss or damage arising principally
because of the works or any other thing done, or omitted to be done
by the Corporation in accordance with or purporting to be done in
accordance with a licence or other authority conferred or purporting
to be conferred on the Corporation by or under this Act or any other
law.
Because the Bill modifies the powers of the Committee
of Management and because of the modifications to section 85 of the
Constitution Act effected in relation to clauses 28, 29, 30, 32 and
33, it is appropriate that a corresponding limitation exist in respect
of the liability of the Committee of Management."