Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Current HansardDownload Current Hansard   

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Friday, 6 December 1985
Page: 3148


Senator PUPLICK(12.17) —in reply-One can see why the pre-selection panel in Jagajaga was as impressed as it was. The matters raised by Senator Evans are totally unpersuasive. They fall down on the basis of their own argument. If the amendments to the extradition Acts are as significant as the former Attorney-General, Senator Evans, says they are, they clearly breach the guidelines which were given that significant amendments would not be made by way of statute law miscellaneous provisions legislation. Secondly, if the extradition negotiations with Switzerland are delayed, so what? One does not appear to have been overrun by crooks and criminals in the absence of this treaty negotiation with Switzerland or Indonesia to date. Therefore, that argument does not persuade us.

Senator Harradine's points are absolutely valid. The significant amendments to the Family Law Act and the patents legislation are sufficient to indicate that this matter would benefit from further examination by committee. We are relying on the Australian Democrats, hopefully, to adhere to the provisions of their stated policy on the reference of Bills to the Committee. I commend the motion to the Senate.

Question put:

That the motion (Senator Puplick's) be agreed to.