Territory Stories

Debates and Questions - Day 1 - 24 April 2020



Debates and Questions - Day 1 - 24 April 2020

Other title

Parliamentary Record 27


Debates and Questions for 13th Assembly 2019 - 2020; ParliamentNT; Parliamentary Record; 13th Assembly 2016 - 2020




Made available by the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory




Debates and Questions

Publisher name

Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory

Place of publication


File type



Attribution International 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)

Copyright owner

Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory



Parent handle


Citation address


Page content

DEBATES AND QUESTIONS Friday 24 April 2020 8338 now assented to that legislation but not commenced it. That means you have held up all the good parts of that legislation because of a very small component, which could be dealt with today. There is no reason you cannot repeal these two sections. Then you can allow the commencement of the other legislation that has been passed by the Assembly for the benefit of Territorians, which should come into fruition because it makes peoples lives better, and appropriately deal with this small part that you have admitted creates uncertainty. You admitted that and I can assure you it creates uncertainty going forward. You cannot have a foot in each camp. Because you are making this decision not to repeal it, you are now holding up all the other legislative amendments the Assembly made. You are now saying the bill will not commence. At this time we cannot have uncertainty. This is a clear example of regulatory burden that will cause more angst, time and energy for people. That does not need to happen. The current process for negotiations regarding pets in premises works; there is no problem. The government has not been able to establish or provide evidence that there was a problem in the first place. It did not consult on this amendment. Its own scrutiny committee said that this component should not be passed. It is not about dogs and animals; it is not about name-calling and denigrating the level of debate. We have this legislation in front of us. Last week you said that you will not commence it. You are therefore holding up important legislation that could come into force to support Territorians in their tenancy arrangements. Let us repeal these today. We have that opportunity; we can all move forward with the will of the Assembly with what we have passed and what will work going forward to support Territorians through this difficult time. Attorney-General, while your talk is cheap it very much relates to COVID. I have a press release sitting on my desk with words from you, saying that very thing. That is my rationale on why we should repeal this very small part of the legislation passed a couple of months ago. Mr WOOD: The Attorney-General might say that we are wasting time but we have all day. If there is an important piece of legislation Ms FYLES: We have more bills to go. Mr WOOD: Hang on! I am not denigrating that, but we are entitled to bring forth matters; this is a sittings of parliament. This is an amendment to a bill we are looking for today. I cannot quite work out how this works in practice. It appears as though this bill has not beenit might have been assented to but it has not commenced. The Attorney-General can correct me if I am right but she has concerns about the effect of this section of the bill regardless of whether or not we love animals. There has obviously been a lot of people disagreeing. She has to remember that the scrutiny committee, of which Labor had the majority of people onand my understanding is that the Member for Karama resigned as Chair of that committee because the government overrode the recommendations of that very scrutiny committee Ms FYLES: A point of order, Madam Speaker! Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Nelson, please pause. What is your point of order? Ms FYLES: I ask the member to withdraw that comment; it is not accurate and not fair. The Member for Karama, although she is on the teleconference and may wish to speakI do not believe that is fair. I ask him to withdraw. Mr ACTING DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Nelson, will you withdraw? Mr WOOD: We are going through an important bill. I would not want to debate something that caused angst from that point of view so I am happy to withdraw it. My information came from inside the government; perhaps the information I was given was wrong. Be that as it may, the scrutiny committee had a majority of Labor party people on it. My understanding is it was supported unanimously by the scrutiny committee that sections 65A and 65B should not pass.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are advised that this website may contain the names, voices and images of people who have died, as well as other culturally sensitive content. Please be aware that some collection items may use outdated phrases or words which reflect the attitude of the creator at the time, and are now considered offensive.

We use temporary cookies on this site to provide functionality.
By continuing to use this site without changing your settings, you consent to our use of cookies.