<!--The Official Report of Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly of the Parliament of South Australia are covered by parliamentary privilege. Republication by others is not afforded the same protection and may result in exposure to legal liability if the material is defamatory. You may copy and make use of excerpts of proceedings where (1) you attribute the Parliament as the source, (2) you assume the risk of liability if the manner of your use is defamatory, (3) you do not use the material for the purpose of advertising, satire or ridicule, or to misrepresent members of Parliament, and (4) your use of the extracts is fair, accurate and not misleading. Copyright in the Official Report of Parliamentary Debates is held by the Attorney-General of South Australia.-->
<hansard id="" tocId="" xml:lang="EN-AU" schemaVersion="1.0" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xml="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="hansard_1_0.xsd">
  <name>House of Assembly</name>
  <date date="2008-03-06" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-First Parliament, Second Session (51-2)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>51</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>2</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>House of Assembly</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="2463" />
  <endPage num="2535" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Bills</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Statute Law Revision Bill</name>
      <text id="200803062defdc6746ab458b80001245">
        <heading>STATUTE LAW REVISION BILL</heading>
      </text>
      <subproceeding>
        <name>Second Reading</name>
        <text id="200803062defdc6746ab458b80001246">
          <heading>Second Reading</heading>
        </text>
        <text id="200803062defdc6746ab458b80001247">Adjourned debate on second reading.</text>
        <page num="2534" />
        <text id="200803062defdc6746ab458b80001248">(Continued from 13 February 2007. Page 2019.)</text>
        <talker role="member" id="1813" kind="speech">
          <name>Mrs REDMOND</name>
          <house>House of Assembly</house>
          <electorate id="">Heysen</electorate>
          <startTime time="2008-03-06T16:45:00" />
          <text id="200803062defdc6746ab458b80001249">
            <timeStamp time="2008-03-06T16:45:00" />
            <by role="member" id="1813">Mrs REDMOND (Heysen) (16:45): </by> I guarantee that I will not keep the house long on this bill: if ever there was some rats and mice legislation, this bill is it. The bill itself, in fact, consists of just two clauses and a schedule of amendments. The schedule of amendments applies to a number of acts, notably, the Criminal Assets Confiscation Act, the Dental Practice Act, the Domestic Partners Property Act, the Fire and Emergency Services Act, the Local Government Act and the Passenger Transport Act. They all basically deal with substituting 'domestic partner' for 'spouse' or 'de facto'. So, they generally result from changes to definitions of 'spouse' and 'de facto' that really came about in legislation already previously dealt with by this house and, effectively, all they do is substitute the term 'domestic partner' in those few extra acts that were not captured in our earlier consideration of a large number of acts.</text>
          <text id="200803062defdc6746ab458b80001250">The only other act dealt with under this bill is the South Australian Cooperative and Community Housing Act 1991, and I did specifically seek detail about that at the briefing because, on the face of it, it appeared that the minister could be acquiring authority that the South Australian Co-operative and Community Housing Authority had, or the Housing Trust could be acquiring that authority but, in fact, the South Australian Co-operative and Community Housing Authority was abolished so it is really just a technical point to get rid of the reference, which no longer makes any sense anyway because the authority does not exist. So, there is nothing at all contentious that I can find to argue about with the Attorney in this bill.</text>
        </talker>
        <talker role="member" id="531" kind="interjection">
          <name>The Hon. M.J. Atkinson</name>
          <house>House of Assembly</house>
          <text id="200803062defdc6746ab458b80001251">
            <by role="member" id="531">The Hon. M.J. Atkinson: </by> And if anyone could find it, you could do it, surely!</text>
        </talker>
        <talker role="member" id="1813" kind="speech" continued="true">
          <name>Mrs REDMOND</name>
          <house>House of Assembly</house>
          <text id="200803062defdc6746ab458b80001252">
            <by role="member" id="1813">Mrs REDMOND: </by> And if anyone could find anything in a bill to argue about, I am sure the Attorney and I would do that. So, we have no objection to wishing this bill a speedy passage through both houses.</text>
          <text id="200803062defdc6746ab458b80001253">Bill read a second time and taken through its remaining stages.</text>
        </talker>
      </subproceeding>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>