

- Title
FAMILY LAW AMENDMENT BILL 1996
In Committee
- Database
Senate Hansard
- Date
17-03-1997
- Source
Senate
- Parl No.
38
- Electorate
WA
- Interjector
- Page
1577
- Party
AD
- Presenter
- Status
Final
- Question No.
- Questioner
- Responder
- Speaker
Senator MURRAY
- Stage
- Type
- Context
Bill
- System Id
chamber/hansards/1997-03-17/0107
Previous Fragment Next Fragment
-
Hansard
- Start of Business
- REPRESENTATION OF NEW SOUTH WALES
-
TAXATION LAWS AMENDMENT BILL (No. 1) 1997
BOUNTY LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL 1997 - ORDER OF BUSINESS
-
INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT BILL 1996
INCOME TAX (CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS) BILL 1996
INCOME TAX (TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS) BILL 1996-
In Committee
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator SHERRY
- Senator KERNOT
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator MARGETTS
- Senator KEMP
- Senator MARGETTS
- Senator KEMP
- Senator SHERRY
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator SHERRY
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator SHERRY
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator SHERRY
- Senator MARGETTS
- Senator SHERRY
- Senator MARGETTS
- Senator KERNOT
- Senator SHERRY
- Senator MARGETTS
- Senator KEMP
- Senator KERNOT
- Senator MARGETTS
- Third Reading
-
In Committee
-
FAMILY LAW AMENDMENT BILL 1996
- Second Reading
-
In Committee
- Senator CARR
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator COONEY
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator COONEY
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator O'BRIEN
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator MURRAY
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator MURRAY
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator MURRAY
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator MURRAY
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator MURRAY
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator MURRAY
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator MURRAY
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator CARR
- Senator MURRAY
- Third Reading
-
TELECOMMUNICATIONS BILL 1996
TRADE PRACTICES AMENDMENT (TELECOMMUNICATIONS) BILL 1996
AUSTRALIAN COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY BILL 1996
TELECOMMUNICATIONS (UNIVERSAL SERVICE LEVY) BILL 1996
TELECOMMUNICATIONS (CARRIER LICENCE CHARGES) TERMINATION BILL 1996
TELECOMMUNICATIONS (NUMBERING CHARGES) BILL 1996
TELECOMMUNICATIONS (TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS AND CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS) BILL 1996
TELECOMMUNICATIONS (CARRIER LICENCE FEES) BILL 1996 -
RADIOCOMMUNICATIONS (TRANSMITTER LICENCE TAX) AMENDMENT BILL 1996
RADIOCOMMUNICATIONS (RECEIVER LICENCE TAX) AMENDMENT BILL 1996
RADIOCOMMUNICATIONS AMENDMENT BILL 1996
TELECOMMUNICATIONS (NUMBERING FEES) AMENDMENT BILL 1996
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMENDMENT BILL 1996 - MIGRATION LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL (No. 3) 1996
- ORDER OF BUSINESS
- EUTHANASIA LEGISLATION
- EUTHANASIA LAWS BILL 1996
- Adjournment
- QUESTIONS ON NOTICE
Page: 1577
Senator MURRAY(5.12 p.m.)
—Thank you. Parliamentary secretary, you made the point, if I heard you correctly, that Commonwealth costs are 50 per cent of those of state courts—roughly half. Would you suggest that the reason that states' charges have been higher than the Commonwealth's is the states' narrow income base which has required them to search out every corner for cost increases, not that they found some relationship between the usage of the courts and the charges they apply. In other words, it is not appropriate for the Commonwealth to consider the relationship to states' costs on a comparative basis simply because the motive for the states might be entirely different from yours.