Get Involved - Parliament

Legislation Review Committee

Published on: June 2020

Record: HANSARD-1323879322-110989

Legislation Review Committee

Report: Legislation Review Digest No. 13/57

Report: Legislation Review Digest No. 14/57

Ms FELICITY WILSON:

I move:

That in accordance with Standing Order 306 (7) the reports of the Legislation Review Committee, being orders of the day Legislation Review Digest No. 13/57 and Legislation Review Digest No. 14/57 be considered together.

Motion agreed to.

TEMPORARY SPEAKER (Ms Sonia Hornery):

The question is that the House take note of the reports.

Ms FELICITY WILSON (North Shore) (12:54):

:54 I address the House on behalf of the Legislation Review Committee regarding digests Nos 13 and 14 for this Parliament. As the Parliament was not sitting regularly in May due to COVID-19, both digests were tabled out of session with the Clerks. Digest No. 13 was tabled on 5 May 2020 and digest No. 14 was tabled on 14 May 2020. Similarly to digest No. 12, much of the legislation considered in digests Nos 13 and 14 was emergency legislation designed to respond to the public health and economic impacts of COVID-19. All up the committee considered 45 regulations for these digests, 16 of which related to COVID-19. Of the 45 regulations considered, 11 regulations warranted comment from the committee and nine of those regulations related to COVID-19.

I draw the attention of the Parliament to some of the issues raised in digests Nos 13 and 14. The Residential Tenancies Amendment (COVID-19) Regulation 2020 and the Retail and Other Commercial Leases (COVID-19) Regulation 2020 contained provisions to limit the ability of a landlord to enforce certain rights under residential and commercial tenancy agreements such as terminating a lease due to failure to pay rent. The limits applied if tenants were experiencing economic hardship as a result of COVID-19. In ordinary circumstances, prohibiting landlords from exercising their rights as agreed upon in a lease would impact unduly on freedom of contract—the freedom of parties to choose the contractual terms to which they are subject. However, the committee found that in the current extraordinary circumstances the provisions were a reasonable response to the far-reaching economic consequences of COVID-19. It also noted that the time during which the provisions would apply was limited to no more than six months after their commencement. Given those considerations the committee made no further comment.

Another regulation considered by the committee for these digests was the Public Health Amendment (Penalty Notices) Regulation 2020. The regulation allowed penalty notices to be issued to a person for failure to comply with public health orders made in response to COVID-19. This included orders that required people to self-isolate, to spend time in quarantine and to stay away from certain locations such as residential aged care facilities. The committee therefore found that this regulation was part of a regime that restricted freedom of movement, a right protected by article 12 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Australia is a party. However, the committee further noted that article 12 recognises that derogation from this right may be warranted in certain circumstances, including to protect public health. As the regulation was part of a regime to stop the spread of COVID-19 and its provisions were time-limited, the committee considered that it fell within the public health exemption and that the limits it placed on freedom of movement were reasonable in the circumstances. It therefore made no further comment.

The final regulation on which I comment is the Public Health Amendment (COVID-19 Spitting and Coughing) Regulation 2020. This regulation provided that a penalty notice of $5,000 could be issued to an individual who contravened the Public Health (COVID-19 Spitting and Coughing) Order 2020 by intentionally spitting or coughing on a public official or on another worker while the worker was at their place of work, or travelling to or from it, in a way likely to cause fear about the spread of COVID-19. The committee noted that it would prefer large, on-the-spot penalties such as this to be set down in primary legislation and not left to the regulations. This would foster a greater level of parliamentary oversight concerning the provisions. However, the committee noted that, given the severe circumstances surrounding COVID-19, it was important for the relevant authorities to have flexibility to respond quickly and appropriately to emerging public health issues. The committee further noted that being able to include significant matters in the regulation may further this objective because responses would not be delayed by the need for an amending bill. Given the extraordinary circumstances the committee made no further comment.

That concludes my remarks on digests Nos 13 and 14 of this Parliament. I encourage everyone to read the full digests, which are available on the committee's webpage. As I noted earlier, because the committee's reports on legislation relating to COVID-19 are spread across a number of digests, the committee has decided to compile its reports into the one document and to publish this document on its webpage. The document will be updated and republished as new reports on legislation relating to COVID-19 are tabled by the committee. The committee hopes that this will aid in ease of reference. I commend the digests to the House.

Mr DAVID MEHAN (The Entrance) (12:59):Legislation Review Digest Nos 13 and 14Legislation Review Digest No. 13

:41 I contribute to debate on of this Parliament. In these digests the committee considered 45 regulations and commented on 11. Most of them were COVID-19 related, to deal with the current health emergency, and I encourage members to refer to them. In particular, refers to an important regulation: the Building and Development Certifiers Regulation 2020. This is a controversial issue. It deals with the re-regulation of the private building industry in response to a number of problems identified in that industry. Members might want to refer to that for their own interest and those of their constituents.

Most of the COVID-19 regulations are time-limited. For example, the Local Government (General) Amendment (COVID-19) Regulation 2020 expires six months after it commences or on an earlier date decided by Parliament by resolution of either House. Most of the COVID-19 regulations are in that form. I remind members that the committee has determined that any COVID-19 related regulations or comments on regulation and bills are to be collected on the Legislation Review Committee's homepage on the Parliament's website. In closing, I thank the secretariat and my committee members for their work. I commend both digests to the House.

Reports noted.