Mr WILLIAMS (Attorney-General) (3:46 AM) —in reply—We have two bills in cognate debate—the Administrative Review Tribunal Bill 2000 and Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2000—and the House ought to understand that these are quite important bills. I thank all members who have contributed to the debate, some of whom have contributed at very late hours in the day. A number of issues have been raised, and I think some of those issues are throwing balls at Aunt Sallies—throwing stones at ghosts. Like a lot of what went on in the republic debate, people are not criticising what is proposed but what is, and has been for a long time, the current situation.

Let me start with the question of the funding of the proposed Administrative Review Tribunal. The ART will be funded through portfolio agencies in the same manner as the SSAT and the VRB are currently funded. These funding arrangements have not raised any concerns about the independence of the SSAT or the VRB. Similarly, the independence of the ART will not be compromised by the proposed funding arrangements. The ART will develop a transparent model for calculating the costs of review by the tribunal of decisions made in each of the divisions. This model will relate only to workloads and case loads and not to how individual reviews are decided. I seek leave to continue my remarks in reply on the second reading debate at a later stage.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.